CASE: We report a case of postoperative unilateral hypoglossal nerve palsy after uncomplicated use of the LMA Protector. To the best of our knowledge, this could be the second reported case.
CONCLUSIONS: This case demonstrates that anesthetists need to routinely measure cuff pressure and that the Cuff PilotTM technology is not a panacea for potential cranial nerve injury after airway manipulation.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed and CENTRAL were searched systematically from their inception until June 2018.
REVIEW METHODS: All the randomised clinical trials (RCTs) were included.
RESULTS: Twelve trials were eligible (n = 1867) for inclusion in the data synthesis. In comparison to the placebo cohort, the levosimendan cohort showed a significant reduction in mortality (TSA = inconclusive; ρ = 0.002; I2 = 0%; FEM: OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.39, 0.80), especially in the subgroups of preoperative severe low LVEF ≤ 30% (ρ = 0.003; OR 0.33; 95% CI 0.16, 0.69), preoperative administering of levosimendan (ρ = 0.001; OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.29, 0.74) and patients who had bolus followed by infusion of levosimendan (ρ = 0.005; OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30, 0.81). However, the effect on mortality was not significant in the subgroup analysis of high quality trials (ρ = 0.14; OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.47, 1.12). The levosimendan cohort showed a significantly lower incidence of low-cardiac-output-syndrome (ρ
METHODS: Sixty patients were randomised to receive IV dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg.kg-1 (Group DEX, n = 30) or IV saline (Group P, n = 30). General anaesthesia was maintained with Sevoflurane: oxygen: air, titrated to BIS 40-60. Pain intensity, sedation, rescue analgesics, nausea/vomiting and resumption of daily activities were recorded at 1 h, and postoperative day (POD) 1-5.
RESULTS: Group DEX patients had significant reduction in sevoflurane minimum alveolar concentration (MAC), mean (SD) DEX vs. Placebo 0.6 (0.2) vs. 0.9 (0.1), p = 0.037; reduced postoperative resting pain at 1 h (VAS 0-10) (mean (SD) 1.00 (1.84) vs. 2.63 (2.78), p = 0.004), POD 1 (mean (SD) 1.50 (1.48) vs. 2.87 (2.72), p = 0.002), POD 2 (0.53 (0.97) vs. 1.73 (1.96), p = 0.001) and POD 3 (0.30 (0.75) vs. 0.89 (1.49), p = 0.001). DEX patients also had less pain on movement POD 1 (3.00 (2.12) vs. 4.30 (3.10), p = 0.043) and POD 2 (2.10 (1.98) vs. 3.10 (2.46), p = 0.040), with higher resumption of daily activities by 48 h compared to placebo, 87% vs. 63%, p = 0.04.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a single dose of dexmedetomidine was a useful adjuvant in reducing MAC and postoperative pain (at 1 h and POD 1-3), facilitating faster return to daily activities by 48 h.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12617001120369 , 31st July 2017, retrospectively registered.
AIMS: To investigate the effect of ketamine on emergence agitation in children.
METHODS: Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were systematically searched from their start date until February 2019. Randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous ketamine and placebo in children were sought. The primary outcome was the incidence of emergence agitation. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain score, duration of discharge time, and the adverse effects associated with the use of ketamine, namely postoperative nausea and vomiting, desaturation, and laryngospasm.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies (1125 patients) were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. The incidence of emergence agitation was 14.7% in the ketamine group and 33.3% in the placebo group. Children receiving ketamine had a lower incidence of emergence agitation, with an odds ratio being 0.23 (95% confidence interval: 0.11 to 0.46), certainty of evidence: low. In comparison with the placebo, ketamine group achieved a lower postoperative pain score (odds ratio: -2.42, 95% confidence interval: -4.23 to -0.62, certainty of evidence: very low) and lower pediatric anesthesia emergence delirium scale at 5 minutes after operation (odds ratio: -3.99, 95% confidence interval: -5.03 to -2.95; certainty of evidence: moderate). However, no evidence was observed in terms of incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, desaturation, and laryngospasm.
CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials, high degree of heterogeneity and low certainty of evidence limit the recommendations of ketamine for the prevention of emergence agitation in children undergoing surgery or imaging procedures. However, the use of ketamine is well-tolerated without any notable adverse effects across all the included trials.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42019131865.
DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from its inception until May 2019.
REVIEW METHODS: All observational studies were included.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (n = 3,033,814; 184,968 OSA vs 2,848,846 non-OSA) were included for quantitative meta-analysis. In non-cardiac surgery, OSA was significantly associated with a higher incidence of the composite endpoints of postoperative cardiac or cerebrovascular complications (odd ratio: 1.44, 95%CI: 1.17 to 1.78, ρ = 0.007, trial sequential analysis = conclusive; certainty of evidence = very low). In comparison to non-OSA, OSA patients were reported to have nearly 2.5-fold risk of developing pulmonary complications (odd ratio: 2.52, 95%CI: 1.92 to 3.31, ρ
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) from its inception until April 2020.
RESULTS: Six RCTs (n = 3139 patients) were included. In comparison to the GA alone, our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the cancer recurrence rate in patients who received the adjunctive use of RA in the routine care of GA (3 studies, n = 2380 patients; odds ratio 0.93, 95%CI 0.63-1.39, ρ = 0.73, certainty of evidence = very low). Our review also showed no significant difference in cancer-related mortality (2 studies, n = 545; odds ratio 1.20, 95%CI 0.83-1.74, ρ = 0.33, certainty of evidence = low), all-cause mortality (3 studies, n = 2653; odds ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.69-1.39, ρ = 0.89, certainty of evidence = low) and duration of cancer-free survival (2 studies, n = 659; mean difference 0.00 years, 95%CI -0.25-0.25, ρ = 1.00, certainty of evidence = high).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis concluded that the adjunctive use of RA in the routine care of GA did not reduce cancer recurrence rate in cancer resection surgery. However, this finding needs to be interpreted with caution due to low level of evidence, substantial heterogeneity and potential risk of bias across the included studies.
STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020171368.
METHODS: This retrospective study included a total of 941 surgical patients who had a pre-operative home sleep study. The pre-operative CBC was extracted from the electronic patient records. Patients were stratified according to their AHI scores, into mild (AHI ≥ 5 -
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from its inception until April 2020.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All randomized control trials and observational studies comparing RA only versus GA in cancer resection surgery were included. Case report, case series and editorials were excluded.
RESULTS: Ten retrospective observational studies (n = 9708; 4567 GA vs 5141 RA) were included for qualitative and quantitative meta-analysis. In comparison to GA, RA was not significantly associated with a lower cancer recurrence rate in cancer resection surgery (odds ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.53, p = 0.95, certainty of evidence = very low). However, the trial sequential analysis for cancer recurrence rate was inconclusive. Our analysis demonstrated no significant difference between the RA and GA groups in the overall survival rate (odds ratio 1.51, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.51, p = 0.34, certainty of evidence = very low), time to cancer recurrence (mean difference 1.45 months, 95% CI -8.69 to 11.59, p = 0.78, certainty of evidence = very low), cancer-related mortality (odds ratio 1.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 5.62, p = 0.32, certainty of evidence = very low).
CONCLUSIONS: Given the low level of evidence and underpowered trial sequential analysis, our review neither support nor oppose that the use of RA was associated with lower incidence of cancer recurrence rate than GA in cancer resection surgery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42020163780.
METHODS: This was a planned post-hoc analysis of multicenter prospective cohort study involving 1,218 at-risk surgical patients without prior diagnosis of sleep apnea. All patients underwent home sleep apnea testing (ApneaLink Plus, ResMed) simultaneously with pulse oximetry (PULSOX-300i, Konica Minolta Sensing, Inc). The predictive performance of the 4% oxygen desaturation index (ODI) versus apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) were determined.
RESULTS: Of 1,218 patients, the mean age was 67.2 ± 9.2 years and body mass index (BMI) was 27.0 ± 5.3 kg/m2. The optimal cut-off for predicting moderate-to-severe and severe OSA was ODI ≥15 events/hour. For predicting moderate-to-severe OSA (AHI ≥15), the sensitivity and specificity of ODI ≥ 15 events per hour were 88.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.7-90.6) and 95.4% (95% CI, 94.2-96.4). For severe OSA (AHI ≥30), the sensitivity and specificity were 97.2% (95% CI, 92.7-99.1) and 78.8% (95% CI, 78.2-79.0). The area under the curve (AUC) for moderate-to-severe and severe OSA was 0.983 (95% CI, 0.977-0.988) and 0.979 (95% CI, 0.97-0.909) respectively.
DISCUSSION: ODI from oximetry is sensitive and specific in predicting moderate-to-severe or severe OSA in at-risk surgical population. It provides an easy, accurate, and accessible tool for at-risk surgical patients with suspected OSA.
DESIGN AND SETTING: The study was a planned post hoc analyses of a multicenter prospective cohort study.
PATIENTS: The inclusion criteria were patients ≥45 years old undergoing major non-cardiac surgery with cardiovascular risk factors.
INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS: All patients underwent pre-operative pulse oximetry (PULSOX-300i, Konica-Minolta Sensing, Inc). The severity of OSA was classified based on oxygen desaturation index (ODI) (mild: ≥5 to <15, moderate: ≥15 to <30, and severe OSA: ≥30 events/h). The 30 days cardiovascular events were a composite of myocardial injury, cardiac death, congestive heart failure, thromboembolism, atrial fibrillation, and stroke.
MAIN RESULTS: For 1218 patients with mild, moderate, or severe OSA (mean age: 67.2 ± 9.3 years; body mass index: 27.0 ± 5.3 kg/m2), the rate of postoperative cardiovascular events was 16.4%, 25.2%, and 29.8% respectively. The multivariable analysis showed that preoperative oxygen desaturation index (ODI) ≥30 events per hour {adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.63 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05-2.53]}, and cumulative time spent during sleep with oxygen saturation below 80% (CT80) ≥10 min {aHR 1.79 [95% CI: 1.28-2.50]} were independent predictors of 30-day postoperative cardiovascular events.
CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative ODI ≥30 events per hour and CT80 ≥ 10 min are associated with increased risk of postoperative cardiovascular events. Preoperative screening using oximetry helps in risk stratification for unrecognized sleep apnea.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01494181.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched systematically from inception until January 2020. Our primary outcomes included laryngeal exposure as measured by Cormack-Lehane Grade 1 or 2 (CLG 1/2), CLG 3 or 4 (CLG 3/4), and first attempt success at intubation. Secondary outcomes were intubation time, use of airway adjuncts, ancillary maneuvers and complications during ETI.
RESULTS: Seven studies met our inclusion criteria, of which 4 were RCTs and 3 were cohort studies. The meta-analysis was conducted by pooling the effect estimates for all 4 included RCTs (n=632). There were no differences found between ramping and sniffing positions for odds of CLG 1/2, CLG 3/4, first attempt success at intubation, intubation time, use of ancillary airway maneuvers and use of airway adjuncts, with evidence of high heterogeneity across studies. However, the ramping position in surgical patients is associated with increased likelihood of CLG 1/2 (OR=2.05, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.32, p=0.004) and lower likelihood of CLG 3/4 (OR=0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.79, p=0.004), moderate quality of evidence.
CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that the ramping position may benefit surgical patients undergoing ETI by improving laryngeal exposure. Large-scale well-designed multicentre RCTs should be carried out to further elucidate the benefits of the ramping position in the surgical and intensive care unit patients.
METHODS: A total of 138 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I to III patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups and underwent baseline laryngoscopy in the sniffing position. Group BUHE patients (n = 69) were then intubated in the BUHE position, while group GLSC patients (n = 69) were intubated using GLSC laryngoscopy. Laryngeal exposure was measured using Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score and Cormack-Lehane (CL) grading, and noninferiority will be declared if the difference in mean POGO scores between both groups do not exceed -15% at the lower limit of a 98% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes measured included time required for intubation (TRI), number of intubation attempts, use of airway adjuncts, effort during laryngoscopy, and complications during intubation.
RESULTS: Mean POGO score in group BUHE was 80.14% ± 22.03%, while in group GLSC it was 86.45% ± 18.83%, with a mean difference of -6.3% (98% CI, -13.2% to 0.6%). In both groups, there was a significant improvement in mean POGO scores when compared to baseline laryngoscopy in the sniffing position (group BUHE, 25.8% ± 4.7%; group GLSC, 30.7% ± 6.8%) (P < .0001). The mean TRI was 36.23 ± 14.41 seconds in group BUHE, while group GLSC had a mean TRI of 44.33 ± 11.53 seconds (P < .0001). In patients with baseline CL 3 grading, there was no significant difference between mean POGO scores in both groups (group BUHE, 49.2% ± 19.6% versus group GLSC, 70.5% ± 29.7%; P = .054).
CONCLUSIONS: In the general population, BUHE intubation position provides a noninferior laryngeal view to GLSC intubation. The laryngeal views obtained in both approaches were superior to the laryngeal view obtained in the sniffing position. In view of the many advantages of the BUHE position for intubation, the lack of proven adverse effects, the simplicity, and the cost-effectiveness, we propose that clinicians should consider the BUHE position as the standard intubation position for the general population.