-
Frontiers in Medicine 2023This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the efficacy of acupuncture therapy (including manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture)...
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the efficacy of acupuncture therapy (including manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture) performed before or during gastrointestinal endoscopy with propofol as the main sedative, compared with placebo, sham acupuncture, or no additional treatment other than the same sedation.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Databases (CBM), Wanfang database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), SinoMed, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP) to collect randomized controlled trials published before 5 November 2022. Bias assessment of the included RCTs was performed according to Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). Stata16.0 software was used to perform statistical analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias analysis. The primary outcome was sedative consumption, and the secondary outcomes included the incidence of adverse events and wake-up time.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies with 1331 participants were included. The results showed that sedative consumption [mean difference (MD) = -29.32, 95% CI (-36.13, -22.50), < 0.001], wake-up time [MD = -3.87, 95% CI (-5.43, -2.31), < 0.001] and the incidence of adverse events including hypotension, nausea and vomiting, and coughing ( < 0.05) were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group.
CONCLUSION
Acupuncture combined with sedation reduces sedative consumption and wake-up time compared with sedation alone in gastrointestinal endoscopy; this combined approach allows patients to regain consciousness more quickly after examination and lower the risk of adverse effects. However, with the limited quantity and quality of relevant clinical studies, caution must be applied until more high-quality clinical studies verify and refine the conclusions.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?, identifier: CRD42022370422.
PubMed: 37396891
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1189429 -
BMC Anesthesiology Jun 2023Patients who undergo gastrointestinal endoscopy often require propofol-based sedation combined with analgesics. At present, the efficacy and safety of esketamine as an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients who undergo gastrointestinal endoscopy often require propofol-based sedation combined with analgesics. At present, the efficacy and safety of esketamine as an adjunct to propofol for sedation during endoscopic procedures in patients remains controversial. Moreover, there is no universal agreement regarding the appropriate dose of esketamine supplementation. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of esketamine as an adjunct to propofol for sedation during endoscopic procedures in patients.
METHODS
Seven electronic databases and three clinical trial registry platforms were searched and the deadline was February 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of esketamine for sedation were included by two reviewers. Data from the eligible studies were combined to calculate the pooled risk ratio or standardized mean difference.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies with 1962 esketamine participants were included in the analysis. As an adjunct to propofol, the administration of esketamine reduced the recovery time compared to normal saline (NS). However, there was no significant difference between the opioids group and ketamine group. For propofol dosage, the administration of esketamine required a lower propofol dosage compared to the NS group and opioids group].For complications, the esketamine group had fewer complications compared to the NS group and opioid group in patients, but there were no significant differences between the esketamine group and ketamine group. Notably, the coadministration of esketamine was associated with a higher risk of visual disturbance compared to the NS group. In addition, we used subgroup analysis to investigate whether 0.2-0.5 mg/kg esketamine was effective and tolerable for patients.
CONCLUSION
Esketamine as an adjunct to propofol, is an appropriate effective alternative for sedation in participants undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy. However, considering the possibility of its psychotomimetic effects, esketamine should be used with caution.
Topics: Humans; Ketamine; Analgesics, Opioid; Propofol; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Saline Solution
PubMed: 37312027
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02167-0 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2023To determine the comparative effects of acupuncture and related techniques-assisted general anesthesia (GA) on the total dosage of main anesthetic drugs administered...
Effect of perioperative acupuncture-assisted general anesthesia on the anesthetic dosage required in adult surgical patients: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the comparative effects of acupuncture and related techniques-assisted general anesthesia (GA) on the total dosage of main anesthetic drugs administered during surgery.
METHODS
The following data bases were searched on June 30, 2022: Embase, Cochrane, PubMed, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, WANFANG and VIP to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were employed. The GRADE system was applied to make evidence quality assessments. The intraoperative total doses of propofol and remifentanil were the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined to measure the size of any potential effect.
RESULTS
Seventy-six RCTs that involved 5,877 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with GA, a significant decrease in the total dose of propofol was found for manual acupuncture (MA) assisted GA (WMD = -101.26 mg, 95% CI [-172.98, -27.06]) with moderate quality, electroacupuncture (EA) assisted GA (WMD = -54.25 mg, 95% CI [-87.25, -22.37]) with moderate quality and transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) assisted GA (WMD = -39.99 mg, 95% CI [-57.96, -22.73]) with moderate quality, respectively. A significant reduction in the total dose of remifentanil was found in favor of EA-assisted GA (WMD = -372.33 μg, 95% CI [-558.44, -196.43]) with low quality and TEAS-assisted GA (WMD = -215.77 μg, 95% CI [-305.23, -128.04]) with low quality. According to the surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA), MA-assisted GA and EA-assisted GA ranked first in the reduction of the total dosage of propofol and remifentanil administered, with a probability of 0.85 and 0.87, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Both EA- and TEAS-assisted GA significantly reduced the intraoperative total dosage of propofol and remifentanil administered. EA produced the greatest reduction in these two outcomes compared to TEAS. Although all the comparisons are low to moderate based on GRADE evidence, EA seems to be an advisable acupuncture technique to reduce the dosage of anesthetic drugs required in surgical patients under GA.
PubMed: 37234245
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1133585 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2023Postictal agitation (PIA) after electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a serious clinical problem estimated to occur in 7-36% of patients and recur in 19-54% of patients....
BACKGROUND
Postictal agitation (PIA) after electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a serious clinical problem estimated to occur in 7-36% of patients and recur in 19-54% of patients. PIA has the potential to cause dangerous situations for the patient and staff members aside from the financial impact. To date, it is unclear which pharmacological interventions should be used in the management of PIA. This study aimed to systematically review the (preventative) pharmacological treatment options for PIA after ECT.
METHOD
A systematic search was done in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception until 10 November 2022. We included randomized trials with any pharmacological intervention or comparison and a predefined outcome measure on PIA. Studies that solely included patients with neurodegenerative disorders or stroke were excluded. Data quality was assessed with the RoB2 and GRADE. Meta-analysis was performed if possible. This study was registered on PROSPERO under CRD42021262323.
RESULTS
We screened 2,204 articles and included 14 studies. Dexmedetomidine was investigated in 10 studies. Alfentanil, lignocaine, esmolol, midazolam, propofol, ketamine, haloperidol, and diazepam were each studied in only one study. Meta-analysis revealed an OR of 0.45 (0.32-0.63), a moderate effect size, in favor of dexmedetomidine than placebo to prevent PIA with very low heterogeneity (I = 0%). The certainty of the evidence was moderate. The other interventions studied were all found to have low certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSION
For clinical practice, we believe that our results indicate that dexmedetomidine should be considered for the prevention of PIA in patients that have previously experienced PIA.
PubMed: 37151968
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1170931 -
BMC Anesthesiology Apr 2023The benefit of remote ischemia preconditioning (RIPreC) in pediatric cardiac surgery is unclear. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The benefit of remote ischemia preconditioning (RIPreC) in pediatric cardiac surgery is unclear. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effectiveness of RIPreC in reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay after pediatric cardiac surgery.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 31, 2022. Randomized controlled trials comparing RIPreC versus control in children undergoing cardiac surgery were included. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. The outcomes of interest were postoperative duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis to calculate weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the outcomes of interest. We performed sensitivity analysis to examine the influence of intraoperative propofol use.
RESULTS
Thirteen trials enrolling 1,352 children were included. Meta-analyses of all trials showed that RIPreC did not reduce postoperative duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD -5.35 h, 95% CI -12.12-1.42) but reduced postoperative ICU length of stay (WMD -11.48 h, 95% CI -20.96- -2.01). When only trials using propofol-free anesthesia were included, both mechanical ventilation duration (WMD -2.16 h, 95% CI -3.87- -0.45) and ICU length of stay (WMD -7.41 h, 95% CI -14.77- -0.05) were reduced by RIPreC. The overall quality of evidence was moderate to low.
CONCLUSIONS
The effects of RIPreC on clinical outcomes after pediatric cardiac surgery were inconsistent, but both postoperative mechanical ventilation duration and ICU length of stay were reduced in the subgroup of children not exposed to propofol. These results suggested a possible interaction effect of propofol. More studies with adequate sample size and without intraoperative propofol use are needed to define the role of RIPreC in pediatric cardiac surgery.
Topics: Child; Humans; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Propofol; Intensive Care Units; Ischemic Preconditioning; Length of Stay; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 37005591
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02064-6 -
Minerva Anestesiologica 2023This review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the side effects and efficacy of esketamine combined with propofol in procedural sedation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the side effects and efficacy of esketamine combined with propofol in procedural sedation and analgesia.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies occurring between their inceptions and September 2022. The primary outcome was the incidence of sedation-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included recovery time, total consumption of propofol and body movement.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Data from a total of seven RCTs enrolling 808 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooling of data showed that compared with other drug regimens, the esketamine and propofol combination was associated with a reduction in the risk of hypotension (relative risk [RR]: 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25 to 0.56) and bradycardia (RR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.80) as well as an increase in the risk of agitation (RR: 6.29, 95% CI: 1.15 to 34.32). The results also indicated a decrease in propofol consumption (standardized mean difference: -1.45, 95% CI: -2.39 to -0.50) with the use of the esketamine and propofol combination. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in respiratory depression, nausea/vomiting, recovery time or body movement.
CONCLUSIONS
Esketamine combined with propofol has an advantage in reducing the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia during procedural sedation and analgesia, but it may increase the risk of agitation in the recovery phase. More studies of high quality are needed before the widespread adoption of the combination of esketamine and propofol.
Topics: Humans; Propofol; Bradycardia; Pain; Analgesia; Hypotension
PubMed: 36988407
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.23.17100-8 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Jan 2023Intrapulmonary shunt is a major determinant of oxygenation in thoracic surgery under one-lung ventilation. We reviewed the effects of available treatments on shunt,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Impact of pharmacological interventions on intrapulmonary shunt during one-lung ventilation in adult thoracic surgery: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Intrapulmonary shunt is a major determinant of oxygenation in thoracic surgery under one-lung ventilation. We reviewed the effects of available treatments on shunt, Pao/FiO and haemodynamics through systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Online databases were searched for RCTs comparing pharmacological interventions and intrapulmonary shunt in thoracic surgery under one-lung ventilation up to March 30, 2022. Random-effects (component) network meta-analysis compared 24 treatments and 19 treatment components. The Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework assessed evidence certainty. The primary outcome was intrapulmonary shunt fraction during one-lung ventilation.
RESULTS
A total of 55 RCTs were eligible for systematic review (2788 participants). The addition of NO (mean difference [MD]=-15%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -25 to -5; P=0.003) or almitrine (MD=-13%; 95% CI, -20 to -6; P<0.001) to propofol anaesthesia were efficient at decreasing shunt. Combined epidural anaesthesia (MD=3%; 95% CI, 1-5; P=0.005), sevoflurane (MD=5%; 95% CI, 2-8; P<0.001), isoflurane (MD=6%; 95% CI, 4-9; P<0.001), and desflurane (MD=9%; 95% CI, 4-14; P=0.001) increased shunt vs propofol. Almitrine (MD=147 mm Hg; 95% CI, 58-236; P=0.001), dopexamine (MD=88 mm Hg; 95% CI, 4-171; P=0.039), and iloprost (MD=81 mm Hg; 95% CI, 4-158; P=0.038) improved Pao/FiO. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate.
CONCLUSIONS
Adding NO or almitrine to propofol anaesthesia reduced intrapulmonary shunt during one-lung ventilation. Halogenated anaesthetics increased shunt in comparison with propofol. The effects of NO, iloprost, and dexmedetomidine should be investigated in future research. NO results constitute a research hypothesis currently not backed by any direct evidence. The clinical availability of almitrine is limited.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL
PROSPERO CRD42022310313.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Almitrine; Iloprost; Network Meta-Analysis; One-Lung Ventilation; Propofol; Thoracic Surgery
PubMed: 36939497
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.08.039 -
Critical Care Explorations Mar 2023To compare the relative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions in the prevention of delirium in ICU trauma patients. (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
To compare the relative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions in the prevention of delirium in ICU trauma patients.
DATA SOURCES
We searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Embase, and Cochrane Registry of Clinical Trials from database inception until June 7, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacologic interventions in critically ill trauma patients.
STUDY SELECTION
Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.
DATA EXTRACTION
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for network analysis were followed. Random-effects models were fit using a Bayesian approach to network meta-analysis. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, each with 95% credible intervals. Treatment rankings were estimated for each outcome in the form of surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.
DATA SYNTHESIS
A total 3,541 citations were screened; six randomized clinical trials ( = 382 patients) were included. Compared with combined propofol-dexmedetomidine, there may be no difference in delirium prevalence with dexmedetomidine (HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.39-6.94), propofol (HR 2.38, 95% CI 0.68-11.36), nor haloperidol (HR 3.38, 95% CI 0.65-21.79); compared with dexmedetomidine alone, there may be no effect with propofol (HR 1.66, 95% CI 0.79-3.69) nor haloperidol (HR 2.30, 95% CI 0.88-6.61).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that there is no difference found between pharmacologic interventions on delirium occurrence, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, or mortality, in trauma ICU patients.
PubMed: 36937896
DOI: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000875 -
European Review For Medical and... Feb 2023Myoclonus is one of the main complications of etomidate anesthesia, which would develop into serious consequences during surgery. The present analysis was performed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Myoclonus is one of the main complications of etomidate anesthesia, which would develop into serious consequences during surgery. The present analysis was performed to evaluate systematically the effect of propofol on preventing etomidate-induced myoclonus in adult patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Systematic electronic literature search was performed in the databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, OVID, Wanfang and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) from inception to May 20, 2021, without any language restrictions. All randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of propofol on preventing etomidate-induced myoclonus were enrolled. The primary outcome included the incidence and degree of etomidate-induced myoclonus.
RESULTS
1,420 patients (with 602 received etomidate anesthesia and 818 received propofol plus etomidate anesthesia) from 13 studies were eventually included. Whatever the intravenous propofol dose for anesthesia induction 0.8-2 mg/kg (RR:4.04, 95% CI [2.42,6.74] p<0.0001, I2=56.5%), or the dose of propofol for anesthesia induction 0.5-0.8 mg/kg (RR:3.26, 95% CI [2.03,5.22] p<0.0001, I2=0%), or the dose of propofol for anesthesia induction 0.25-0.5mg/kg (RR:1.68, 95% CI [1.1,2.56] p=0.0160, I2=0%), combination of propofol and etomidate could significantly decrease the occurrence of etomidate-related myoclonus (RR=2.99, 95% CI [2.40, 3.71] p<0.0001, I2=43.4%), compared with etomidate alone. In addition, propofol plus etomidate attenuated the incidence of mild (RR:3.40, 95% CI [1.7,6.82] p=0.0010, I2=54.3%), moderate (RR:5.4, 95% CI [3.01, 9.67] p<0.0001, I2=12.6%), severe (RR:4.15, 95% CI [2.11, 8.13] p<0.0001, I2=0%) of etomidate-induced myoclonus without adverse effects except for the increased incidence of pain on injection (RR:0.47, 95% CI [0.26, 0.83] p=0.0100, I2=41.5%) compared with etomidate alone.
CONCLUSIONS
The meta-analysis currently generates the evidence of combination of propofol with the dosage of 0.25-2 mg/kg and etomidate can alleviate the occurrence and severity of etomidate-induced myoclonus, with decreased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and comparative side effects of hemodynamic and respiratory depression of patients in comparison with etomidate alone.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Anesthesia, General; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Etomidate; Myoclonus; Pain; Propofol
PubMed: 36876671
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202302_31366 -
Medicine Feb 2023Propofol is increasingly being used for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, owing to its side effects, an alternative drug is needed. We aimed to compare... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Propofol is increasingly being used for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, owing to its side effects, an alternative drug is needed. We aimed to compare the safety, satisfaction, and efficacy outcomes of etomidate versus propofol in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy, including advanced endoscopic procedures.
METHODS
We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL (via EBSCO), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Web of Science (1946-April 2020) databases for randomized controlled trials of gastrointestinal endoscopy (upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, colonoscopy, and advanced endoscopy) using etomidate or propofol as sedatives. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) for the safety profile and patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction using mixed-effects conditional logistic models and standardized mean differences for efficiency outcomes using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies involving 3875 patients were included. Compared with propofol, etomidate resulted in significantly reduced apnea (OR: 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.37; P < .001), hypoxemia (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.35-0.54; P < .001), hypotension (OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; P < .001), and bradycardia (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.30-0.91; P = .02) but led to increased myoclonus (OR: 8.54; 95% CI: 5.20-14.01; P < .001) and lowered anesthesiologist satisfaction (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.39-0.91; P = .02).
CONCLUSION
Etomidate may be a good alternative to propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy, especially advanced endoscopy. Etomidate appears to be safe as an inducer for hemodynamically unstable patients or older adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Propofol; Etomidate; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Colonoscopy
PubMed: 36820568
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032876