Journal of clinical anesthesia
-
Review Comparative Study
Outcomes of cancer surgery after inhalational and intravenous anesthesia: A systematic review.
Perioperative factors are probably essential for different oncological outcomes. This systematic review investigates the literature concerning overall mortality and postoperative complications after cancer surgery with inhalational (INHA) and intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). A search was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, including studies with patients undergoing surgery for cancer and where TIVA was compared with INHA. ⋯ In one study, the rate of pulmonary complications was significantly higher after INHA compared with TIVA, while other postoperative complications were comparable. There are currently four propensity-adjusted retrospective studies indicating that TIVA might be the preferred anesthetic choice in cancer surgery. However, evidence is currently of low quality and randomized clinical trials are required for further investigation.
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Programmed intermittent peripheral nerve local anesthetic bolus compared with continuous infusions for postoperative analgesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
The role of the programmed intermittent bolus (PIB) technique for infusion of local anesthetics in continuous peripheral nerve blockade (CPNB) remains to be elucidated. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PIB versus continuous infusion for CPNB have demonstrated conflicting results and no systematic review or meta-analysis currently exists. We aimed to delineate via systematic review with meta-analysis if there is any analgesic benefit to performing PIB versus continuous infusion for CPNB. ⋯ The existing evidence demonstrates that PIB does not meaningfully reduce VAS pain scores in CPNB. This systematic review provides important information about the limitations of existing studies. Future studies should reflect contemporary practice and focus on more painful operations.
-
Inattentional blindness is the psychological phenomenon of inability to see the unexpected even if it is in plain view. We hypothesized that anesthesiologists may overlook unexpected intraoperative events whereas medical students, lacking in intraoperative monitoring experience and knowledge, may be more likely to notice such events. ⋯ Students were significantly more likely than anesthesiologists to notice head movement (p<0.001).