Dataset Information

The EasyTube during general anesthesia for minor surgery: A randomized, controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The EasyTube (EzT) is a supraglottic airway device that is used for emergency airway situations. Ventilation during general anesthesia should also be feasible, but literature on the EzT is scarce. We evaluated the EzT in comparison with the endotracheal tube (ETT) in its use during general anesthesia in a comparative study.

Methods

A total of 400 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I to II scheduled for minor surgery in 4 centers were randomized for ventilation via the ETT or EzT.

Results

In all patients, the EzT and the ETT could be inserted within 3 attempts. In all EzT patients, the inspiratory and expiratory minute volumes (6.64 ± 0.71 and 6.34 ± 0.69 L/min) were sufficient to reach target oxygenation values, similar to ETT patients (P = .59). Mean peak pressure, mean plateau pressure, and mean dynamic compliance did not differ between the groups. Sore throat and blood on the cuff after removal were the most frequent complications in both groups.

Conclusion

Ventilation for up to 1 hour during general anesthesia in patients with ASA physical status I to II with the EzT is feasible and safe.

SUBMITTER: Robak O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5484212 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The EasyTube during general anesthesia for minor surgery: A randomized, controlled trial.

Robak Oliver O Vaida Sonia S Gaitini Luis L Thierbach Andreas A Urtubia Ricardo R Krafft Peter P Frass Michael M

Medicine 20170601 25

<h4>Background</h4>The EasyTube (EzT) is a supraglottic airway device that is used for emergency airway situations. Ventilation during general anesthesia should also be feasible, but literature on the EzT is scarce. We evaluated the EzT in comparison with the endotracheal tube (ETT) in its use during general anesthesia in a comparative study.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 400 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I to II scheduled for minor surgery in 4 centers we ...[more]

PMID: 28640104

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe EasyTube® (EzT) is a supraglottic airway device (SAD) enabling ventilation irrespective of its placement into the esophagus or trachea. Data obtained on SADs from multicenter studies, performed in highly specialized centers cannot always be transferred to other sites. However, data on comparability of different sites are scarce. This study focused on inter-site variability of ventilatory and safety parameters during general anesthesia with the EzT.Methods400 patients with ASA physical status I-II undergoing general anesthesia for elective surgery in four medical centers (EzT group (n = 200), ETT group (n = 200)). Mallampati classification, success of insertion, insertion time, duration of ventilation, number of insertion attempts, ease of insertion, tidal volumes, leakage, hemodynamic parameters, oxygenation, and complications rates with the EasyTube (EzT) or endotracheal tube (ETT) in comparison within the sites and in between the sites were recorded.ResultsIntra-site and inter-site comparison of insertion success as primary outcome did not differ significantly. The inter-site comparison of expiratory minute volumes showed that the volumes achieved over the course of anesthesia did not differ significantly, however, mean leakage at one site was significantly higher with the EzT (0.63 l/min, p = 0.02). No significant inter-site differences in heart rate, blood pressure, or oxygenation were observed. Sore throat and blood on the cuff after removal of the device were the most frequent complications with significantly more complications at one site with the EzT (p = 0.01) where insertion was also reported significantly more difficult (p = 0.02).ConclusionPerformance of the EzT but not the ETT varied between sites with regard to insertion difficulty, leakage, and complications but not insertion success, ventilation, hemodynamics, and oxygenation parameters in patients with ASA physical status 1-2 during general anesthesia undergoing minor elective surgery.

Project description:BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is now widely used in various surgical fields including gynecological laparoscopic surgery, but the advantages of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) in gynecological laparoscopic surgery under ERAS protocol are inexact.AimsThis study aims to assess the effectiveness and feasibility of OFA technique versus traditional opioid-based anesthesia (OA) technique in gynecological laparoscopic surgery under ERAS.MethodsAdult female patients aged 18 ~ 65 years old undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery were randomly divided into OFA group (Group OFA, n = 39) with esketamine and dexmedetomidine or OA group (Group OA, n = 38) with sufentanil and remifentanil. All patients adopted ERAS protocol. The primary outcome was the area under the curve (AUC) of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores (AUCVAS) postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative hemodynamic variables, awakening and orientation recovery times, number of postoperative rescue analgesia required, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) perioperatively.ResultsAUCVAS was (Group OFA, 16.72 ± 2.50) vs (Group OA, 15.99 ± 2.72) (p = 0.223). No difference was found in the number of rescue analgesia required (p = 0.352). There were no between-group differences in mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) (p = 0.211 and 0.659, respectively) except MAP at time of surgical incision immediately [(Group OFA, 84.38 ± 11.08) vs. (Group OA, 79.00 ± 8.92), p = 0.022]. Times of awakening and orientation recovery in group OFA (14.54 ± 4.22 and 20.69 ± 4.92, respectively) were both longer than which in group OA (12.63 ± 3.59 and 18.45 ± 4.08, respectively) (p = 0.036 and 0.033, respectively). The incidence of PONV in group OFA (10.1%) was lower than that in group OA (28.9%) significantly (p = 0.027). The postoperative PSQI was lower than the preoperative one in group OFA (p = 0.013).ConclusionIn gynecological laparoscopic surgery under ERAS protocol, OFA technique is non-inferior to OA technique in analgesic effect and intraoperative anesthesia stability. Although awakening and orientation recovery times were prolonged compared to OA, OFA had lower incidence of PONV and improved postoperative sleep quality.Trial registrationChiCTR2100052761, 05/11/2021.

Project description:ImportanceHypnosis is now widespread in medical practice and is emerging as an alternative technique for pain management and anxiety. However, its effects on postoperative outcomes remain unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of a preoperative hypnosis session for reducing postoperative breast pain in patients who underwent minor breast cancer surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThe HYPNOSEIN prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted from October 7, 2014, to April 5, 2016. In this multicenter study in France, 150 women scheduled for minor breast cancer surgery were randomized between control and hypnosis arms, and 148 (71 control and 77 hypnosis) were included in the intent-to-treat analysis.InterventionOn the day of surgery, eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the control arm or the hypnosis arm. Patients (but not the care teams) were blinded to the arm to which they were assigned. A 15-minute hypnosis session before general anesthesia in the operating room was performed in the hypnosis arm.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was breast pain reduction (by 2 on a visual analog scale), assessed immediately before discharge from the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Secondary end points were nausea/vomiting, fatigue, comfort/well-being, anxiety, and PACU length of stay, assessed at different times until postoperative day 30.ResultsThe median patient age was 57 years (range, 33-79 years) in the control arm and 53 years (range, 20-84 years) in the hypnosis arm. Baseline characteristics were similar in the 2 arms. The median duration of the hypnosis session was 6 minutes (range, 2-15 minutes). The use of intraoperative opioids and hypnotics was lower in the hypnosis arm. The mean (SD) breast pain score (range, 0-10) was 1.75 (1.59) in the control arm vs 2.63 (1.62) in the hypnosis arm (P = .004). At PACU discharge and with longer follow-up, no statistically significant difference in breast pain was reported. Fatigue was significantly lower in the hypnosis arm on the evening of surgery (mean [SD] score, 3.81 [2.15] in the control arm vs 2.99 [2.56] in the hypnosis arm; P = .03). The median PACU length of stay was 60 minutes (range, 20-290 minutes) in the control arm vs 46 minutes (range, 5-100 minutes) in the hypnosis arm (P = .002). Exploratory analyses according to patient perception of whether she received hypnosis showed significantly lower fatigue scores in the perceived hypnosis subgroup on the evening of surgery (mean [SD], 4.13 [2.26] for no perceived hypnosis vs 2.97 [2.42] for perceived hypnosis; P = .01). Anxiety was also significantly lower on the evening of surgery in the perceived hypnosis subgroup (mean [SD], 0.75 [1.64] for perceived hypnosis vs 1.67 [2.29] for no perceived hypnosis; P = .03).Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this study do not support a benefit of hypnosis on postoperative breast pain in women undergoing minor breast cancer surgery. However, other outcomes seem to be improved, which needs to be confirmed by further studies.Trial registrationEudraCT Identifier: 2014-A00681-46 and ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03253159.

Dataset Information

The EasyTube during general anesthesia for minor surgery: A randomized, controlled trial.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The EasyTube during general anesthesia for minor surgery: A randomized, controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets