Dataset Information

Intravenous versus inhalational maintenance of anesthesia for quality of recovery in adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Intravenous and inhalational agents are commonly used in general anesthesia. However, it is still controversial which technique is superior for the quality of postoperative recovery. This meta-analysis aimed at comparing impact of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) versus inhalational maintenance of anesthesia on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

Methods

We systematically searched EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with no language or publication status restriction. Two authors independently performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias. The outcomes were expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) based on a random-effect model. We performed trial sequential analysis (TSA) for total QoR-40 scores and calculated the required information size (RIS) to correct the increased type I error.

Results

A total of 156 records were identified, and 9 RCTs consisting of 922 patients were reviewed and included in the meta-analysis. It revealed a significant increase in total QoR-40 score on the day of surgery with TIVA (MD, 5.91 points; 95% CI, 2.14 to 9.68 points; P = 0.002; I2 = 0.0%). The main improvement was in four dimensions, including "physical comfort", "emotional status", "psychological support" and "physical independence". There was no significant difference between groups in total QoR-40 score (P = 0.120) or scores of each dimension on POD1. The TSA showed that the estimated required information size for total QoR-40 scores was not surpassed by recovered evidence in our meta-analysis. And the adjusted Z-curves did not cross the conventional boundary and the TSA monitoring boundary.

Conclusion

Low-certainty evidence suggests that propofol-based TIVA may improve the QoR-40 score on the day of surgery. But more evidence is needed for a firm conclusion and clinical significance.

SUBMITTER: Shui M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8284831 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInhalational anesthesia and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) are the two most popular methods of general anesthesia with distinct characteristics that may affect quality of recovery (QOR) differently. This study compared QOR after corrective lower limb osteotomy between desflurane-based inhalational anesthesia and propofol-based TIVA.MethodsSixty-eight patients, ASA class I or II who underwent corrective lower limb osteotomy were randomized to receive either desflurane anesthesia or propofol TIVA. The primary outcome was quality of recovery 40 (QoR-40) questionnaire scores on postoperative day (POD) 1 and 2. Postoperative nausea scores, antiemetic requirements, and amount of opioid consumption via intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) were assessed as secondary outcomes.ResultsGlobal QoR-40 scores on POD 1 (153.5 (140.3, 171.3) vs. 140.0 (120.0, 173.0), P = 0.056, 95% CI; -22.5, 0.2) and POD 2 (155.5 (146.8, 175.5) vs. 152.0 (134.0, 179.0), P = 0.209, 95% CI; -17.5, 3.9) were comparable between the two groups. Among the five dimensions of QoR-40, physical independence scores were significantly higher in the TIVA group compared to the Desflurane group on POD both 1 and 2. Nausea scores (0.0 (0.0, 0.0) vs. 1.0 (0.0, 3.5), P < 0.001) and number of patients requiring rescue antiemetics (0% vs. 15.2%, P = 0.017) were significantly lower in the TIVA group at the post anesthesia care unit (PACU). Although the number of bolus attempts between 0-24 h and the morphine equivalent dose of analgesics administered via IV PCA between 12-24 h were significantly less in the TIVA group compared to the Desflurane group, there was no significant difference between groups for the overall 48 h postoperative period.ConclusionsPropofol-based TIVA did not improve global QoR-40 scores compared with desflurane-based inhalational anesthesia. However, considering the better QoR-40 scores in the domain of physical independence and less nausea in the early postoperative period, propofol TIVA should be considered as a useful option in patients undergoing corrective lower limb osteotomy.

Project description:Background and aimTotal intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) has proven advantage over inhalational anesthesia in terms of stable hemodynamic, eco-friendly, and good recovery profile, but apprehension regarding adequate depth of anesthesia and intraoperative recall is still pertaining. This study aims to compare propofol-dexmedetomidine-based TIVA with sevoflurane-based inhalational anesthesia in modified radical mastectomy in terms of depth of anesthesia, intraoperative recall, recovery profile, and hemodynamic status.Settings and designThis prospective randomized controlled study was conducted at a tertiary care center over a time frame of 1 year.MethodologyIn this randomized controlled study, 100 patients were randomly distributed into two groups: TIVA (Group T) and inhalational anesthesia (Group I). Group T patients received injection dexmedetomidine: 1 μg.kg-1 over 10 min followed by 0.7 μg.kg-1.h-1 and injection propofol: 25-100 μg.kg-1.min-1. Ventilation was maintained with oxygen-air gas flow. In Group I, patients were ventilated with nitrous oxide-oxygen (50:50) and sevoflurane. Rest of anesthesia for both the groups was same. Primary objective was to achieve adequate depth of anesthesia as monitored by intraoperative bispectral index value (BIS, 40-60). Hemodynamic variables, recovery profile, and amount of individual anesthetic agent consumed were recorded for comparison between two groups. For comparison of scale variables between two groups, independent sample t-test for significant difference between two sample means has been followed.ResultsIntraoperative BIS and hemodynamic variables were comparable (P > 0.05). Emergence time was 5.10 min in the TIVA group versus 8.38 min in the inhalational group (P = 0.00). Modified Aldrete score was comparable in two groups (P > 0.05). Cost of TIVA agents consumed per patient was 40% lesser than inhalational agents.ConclusionTIVA maintains adequate depth of anesthesia along with stable hemodynamic and good recovery profile, at low cost in an eco-friendly manner.

Project description:BackgroundThe effects of intravenous glucocorticoids on postoperative delirium (POD) in adult patients undergoing major surgery remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to assess whether intravenous glucocorticoids can decrease POD incidence in the entire adult population undergoing major surgery and its association with patients age, type of surgery, and type of glucocorticoid.MethodsWe searched the relevant literature published before November 3, 2023, through Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. The primary outcome was POD incidence. The risk ratio for the primary outcome was calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay, ICU duration, mechanical ventilation duration, and occurrence of glucocorticoid-related adverse effects (e.g., infection and hyperglycemia). This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42022345997.ResultsWe included eight randomized controlled studies involving 8972 patients. For the entire adult population undergoing major surgery, intravenous glucocorticoids reduced the POD incidence (risk ratio = 0.704, 95% confidence interval, 0.519-0.955; P = 0.024). However, subgroups defined by type of surgery showed differential effects of glucocorticoids on POD. Intravenous glucocorticoids can not reduce POD incidence in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery (risk ratio = 0.961, 95% confidence interval, 0.769-1.202; P = 0.728), with firm evidence from trial sequential analysis. However, in major non-cardiac surgery, perioperative intravenous glucocorticoid reduced the incidence of POD (risk ratio = 0.491, 95% confidence interval, 0.338-0.714; P < 0.001), which warrants further studies due to inconclusive evidence by trial sequence analysis. In addition, the use of glucocorticoids may reduce the mechanical ventilation time (weighted mean difference, -1.350; 95% confidence interval, -1.846 to -0.854; P < 0.001) and ICU duration (weighted mean difference = -7.866; 95% confidence interval, -15.620 to -0.112; P = 0.047).ConclusionsFor the entire adult population undergoing major surgery, glucocorticoids reduced the POD incidence. However, the effects of glucocorticoids on POD appear to vary according to the type of surgery. In patients receiving major non-cardiac surgery, glucocorticoid may be an attractive drug in the prevention of POD, and further studies are needed to draw a definitive conclusion. In cardiac surgery, intravenous glucocorticoids have no such effect.

Project description:ImportanceEmergence agitation is common after nasal surgery under general anesthesia and may lead to serious consequences for the patient, including an increased risk of injury, pain, hemorrhage, and self-extubation. Despite decades of research, studies on the incidence, risk factors, and prevention of emergence agitation in adult patients are ongoing, and opinions differ on the different effects of inhalation and intravenous anesthesia.ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of anesthetic method on the occurrence of emergence agitation after nasal surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective, randomized, single-blind, clinical trial included 80 patients undergoing open rhinoplasty, septoplasty, turbinoplasty, endoscopic sinus surgery, and functional endoscopic sinus surgery under general anesthesia who were randomized to receive total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with remifentanil hydrochloride and propofol (n = 40) or volatile induction and maintenance of anesthesia (VIMA) with sevoflurane and nitrous oxide (n = 40) in Asan Medical Center, a tertiary referral center in Seoul, Republic of Korea. Data were collected from August 24 through October 14, 2016, and analyzed from October 26, 2016, through September 14, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresThe occurrence of emergence agitation defined by the following 2 individual criteria: a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score of at least 1 and a Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale score of at least 5 immediately after extubation.ResultsAmong the 80 patients included in the analysis (68.8% men [n = 55]; mean [SD] age, 41.6 [17.9] years), emergence agitation measured by the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale occurred in 8 of 40 patients (20.0%) in the VIMA group and 1 of 40 (2.5%) in the TIVA group. The risk difference was 17.5 (95% CI, 3.6-31.4). Emergence agitation measured by the Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale score occurred in 10 of 40 patients (25.0%) in the VIMA group and 1 of 40 (2.5%) in the TIVA group. The risk difference was 22.5 (95% CI, 7.3-37.7).Conclusions and relevanceThe occurrence of emergence agitation after nasal surgery under general anesthesia can be significantly reduced by using TIVA rather than VIMA.Trial registrationCRIS identifier: KCT0002145.

Project description:BackgroundExternal cephalic version (ECV) is a frequently performed obstetric procedure for fetal breech presentation to avoid cesarean delivery. Neuraxial, intravenous, and inhalational anesthetic techniques have been studied to reduce maternal discomfort caused by the forceful manipulation. This study compares the effects of these anesthetic techniques on ECV and incidence of cesarean delivery.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive literature search for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or well-conducted quasi-randomized trials of ECV performed either without anesthesia or under neuraxial, intravenous, or inhalational anesthesia. Pairwise random-effects meta-analyses and network meta-analyses were performed to compare and rank the perinatal outcomes of the 3 anesthetic interventions and no anesthesia control, including the rate of successful version, cesarean delivery, maternal hypotension, nonreassuring fetal response, and adequacy of maternal pain control/satisfaction.ResultsEighteen RCTs and 1 quasi-randomized trial involving a total of 2296 term parturients with a noncephalic presenting singleton fetus were included. ECV under neuraxial anesthesia had significantly higher odds of successful fetal version compared to control (odds ratio [OR] = 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.88-3.57), compared to intravenous anesthesia (OR = 2.08; 95% CI, 1.36-3.16), and compared to inhalational anesthesia (OR = 2.30; 95% CI, 1.33-4.00). No association was found between anesthesia interventions and rate of cesarean delivery. Neuraxial anesthesia was associated with higher odds of maternal hypotension (OR = 9.33; 95% CI, 3.14-27.68). Intravenous anesthesia was associated with significantly lower odds of nonreassuring fetal response compared to control (OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82). Patients received neuraxial anesthesia reported significantly lower visual analog scale (VAS) of procedure-related pain (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.61; 95% CI, -1.92 to -1.31). The VAS scores of pain were also significantly lower with intravenous (SMD = -1.61; 95% CI, -1.92 to -1.31) and inhalational (SMD = -1.19; 95% CI, -1.58 to -0.8) anesthesia. The VAS of patient satisfaction was significantly higher with intravenous anesthesia (SMD = 1.53; 95% CI, 0.64-2.43).ConclusionsCompared to control, ECV with neuraxial anesthesia had a significantly higher successful rate; however, the odds of maternal hypotension increased significantly. All anesthesia interventions provided significant reduction of procedure-related pain. Intravenous anesthesia had significantly higher score in patient satisfaction and lower odds of nonreassuring fetal response. No evidence indicated that anesthesia interventions were associated with significant decrease in the incidence of cesarean delivery compared to control.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The benefits of volatile anesthetics in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients remain controversial. We aimed to conduct an updated meta-analysis to assess whether the use of volatile anesthetics during CABG could reduce mortality and other outcomes. METHODS:We searched eight databases from inception to June 2019 and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of volatile anesthetics versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in CABG patients. The primary outcomes were operative mortality and one-year mortality. The secondary outcomes included the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital and postoperative safety outcomes (myocardial infarction, heart failure, arrhythmia, stroke, delirium, postoperative cognitive impairment, acute kidney injury, and the use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or other mechanical circulatory support). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to control for random errors. RESULTS:A total of 89 RCTs comprising 14,387 patients were included. There were no significant differences between the volatile anesthetics and TIVA groups in operative mortality (relative risk (RR) = 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-1.24, p = 0.59, I2 = 0%), one-year mortality (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.32-1.26, p = 0.19, I2 = 51%), or any of the postoperative safety outcomes. The lengths of stay in the ICU and hospital were shorter in the volatile anesthetics group than in the TIVA group. TSA revealed that the results for operative mortality, one-year mortality, length of stay in the ICU, heart failure, stroke, and the use of IABP were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS:Conventional meta-analysis suggests that the use of volatile anesthetics during CABG is not associated with reduced risk of mortality or other postoperative safety outcomes when compared with TIVA. TSA shows that the current evidence is insufficient and inconclusive. Thus, future large RCTs are required to clarify this issue.