脑电双频指数和非脑电双频指数麻醉方案对术后恢复结局的影响。
Bispectral Index and non-Bispectral Index anesthetic protocols on postoperative recovery outcomes.
机构信息
Department of Anesthesiology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan -
Department of Anesthesiology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
出版信息
Minerva Anestesiol. 2018 Feb;84(2):216-228. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.12033-X. Epub 2017 Oct 12.
INTRODUCTION
The study aimed to compare Bispectral Index (BIS) and non-BIS anesthetic protocols on postoperative recovery outcomes.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Medline, PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched until January 21, 2016.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Twenty-six studies were included with a total of 9537 patients. BIS monitoring was significantly associated with shorter time to eye opening (P=0.001), time to extubation (P<0.001), and time to orientation (P=0.002) compared with non-BIS monitoring. No difference between groups was seen with respect to hypoxemia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), time to oral fluid intake, and length of Postanesthesia Care Unit (PACU) stay (P values ≥0.185).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of BIS-monitoring is superior to non-BIS monitored anesthesia in terms of shorter time to eye-opening, extubation, and orientation. BIS monitor may be considered a safe and effective method for monitoring depth of anesthesia during surgery.
简介
本研究旨在比较脑电双频指数（BIS）和非 BIS 麻醉方案对术后恢复结果的影响。
证据采集
检索了 Medline、PubMed、Cochrane、EMBASE 和 Google Scholar 数据库，截至 2016 年 1 月 21 日。
证据综合
共纳入 26 项研究，总计 9537 例患者。与非 BIS 监测相比，BIS 监测显著缩短了睁眼时间（P=0.001）、拔管时间（P<0.001）和定向时间（P=0.002）。两组间在低氧血症、术后恶心呕吐（PONV）、口服液体摄入时间和麻醉后监护室（PACU）停留时间方面无差异（P 值≥0.185）。
结论
BIS 监测在缩短睁眼、拔管和定向时间方面优于非 BIS 监测麻醉。BIS 监测仪可能是一种安全有效的监测术中麻醉深度的方法。
Zotero 插件