Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Minerva Anestesiol. 2019 Jun;85(6):665-675. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.19.13377-9. Epub 2019 Feb 13.
Many studies have found that volatile anesthetics are associated with improved clinical outcomes for adults undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. However, the effect of volatile anesthetics for adults after heart valve surgery has been unclear. So we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to explore whether the choice of an anesthetic regimen might influence patients' outcomes after valve surgery.
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to June 2018. We included eligible research comparing inhalation anesthesia with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in adult patients undergoing valve surgery. The major endpoints involved mortality, postoperative arrhythmia, acute kidney injury, pulmonary complications, neurological events, myocardial infarction, reoperation for bleeding. The postoperative peak troponin release, hospital stay, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay and ventilation time were also analyzed.
After screening through 243 potentially relevant articles, we included 13 RCTs with 962 patients. The inhalation anesthesia group revealed comparable mortality (inhalation group 12/249 [4.8%] vs. TIVA group 13/247 [5.3%], RR=0.97; 95% CI: 0.45 to 2.09; P=0.93; P for heterogeneity=0.66, I2=0%) and other postoperative complications with no heterogeneity. The postoperative peak troponin release, hospital/ICU stay and ventilation time were comparable between two groups with considerable heterogeneity.
Among patients undergoing heart valve surgery, the use of inhalation anesthesia compared with TIVA failed to demonstrate superiority for survival and major postoperative complications, and the evidence was insufficient to draw firm conclusions due to the limited sample size. A determination of equivalence or superiority between these two anesthetic regimens requires further researches.
许多研究发现,挥发性麻醉剂可改善接受冠状动脉旁路移植术的成年人的临床结果。然而,挥发性麻醉剂对心脏瓣膜手术后的成年人的影响尚不清楚。因此,我们进行了一项随机对照试验(RCT)的荟萃分析,以探讨麻醉方案的选择是否会影响瓣膜手术后患者的结局。
从建库到 2018 年 6 月,我们检索了 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library。我们纳入了比较吸入麻醉与全凭静脉麻醉(TIVA)在接受瓣膜手术的成年患者中的疗效的合格研究。主要终点包括死亡率、术后心律失常、急性肾损伤、肺部并发症、神经系统事件、心肌梗死、因出血再次手术。还分析了术后肌钙蛋白峰值释放、住院时间、重症监护病房(ICU)停留时间和通气时间。
通过对 243 篇可能相关的文章进行筛选,我们纳入了 13 项 RCT,共 962 例患者。吸入麻醉组死亡率相似(吸入组 249 例中有 12 例[4.8%],TIVA 组 247 例中有 13 例[5.3%],RR=0.97;95%CI:0.45 至 2.09;P=0.93;P 异质性=0.66,I2=0%),其他术后并发症无异质性。两组术后肌钙蛋白峰值释放、住院/ICU 停留时间和通气时间相似,但存在较大的异质性。
在接受心脏瓣膜手术的患者中,与 TIVA 相比,使用吸入麻醉并不能证明在生存率和主要术后并发症方面具有优势,由于样本量有限,证据不足以得出明确的结论。这两种麻醉方案之间的等效性或优越性需要进一步研究。