European review for medical and pharmacological sciences · 2020
Anesthetic effect and safety of sevoflurane combined with propofol in removing tracheobronchial foreign bodies in children.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bilgin Seyda, Kaplan Taylan, Deniz Rabia, Cakar Arman, Durmus Hacer, Parman Yeşim, Bes Cemal, Alibaz Fatma, Gül Ahmet, Direskeneli Haner, Saruhan-Direskeneli Güher
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the anesthetic effect and safety of sevoflurane combined with propofol in removing tracheal foreign bodies in children.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, China Biomedicine Database, China National Knowledge Internet, WanFang Data, and VIP databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sevoflurane combined with propofol for anesthesia during tracheal foreign body extraction in children were collected. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to April 10, 2019. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk bias included in the study.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 473 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that the time of loss of consciousness significantly reduced (MD=-38.27, 95% CI (-41.77, -34.77), p < 0.00001) and the recovery time significantly reduced (MD=-12.29, 95% CI (-2.77, -1.80), p < 0.00001) in the sevoflurane combined with propofol group compared with the control group. In terms of safety, the heart rate was slower [MD=-11.00, 95% CI (-21.64, -0.36), p=0.04 < 0.05] and the incidence of cough and breath holding was lower [MD=0.38, 95% CI (0.19, 0.78), p=0.008] in the sevoflurane combined with propofol group than in the control group. However, no significant difference in respiratory rate and SPO 2 < 90% was found between the two groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Sevoflurane combined with propofol is worth popularizing because of its high anesthetic effect and safety in the removal of tracheal foreign bodies in children. However, given the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions need to be verified by high-quality studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, China Biomedicine Database, China National Knowledge Internet, WanFang Data, and VIP databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sevoflurane combined with propofol for anesthesia during tracheal foreign body extraction in children were collected. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to April 10, 2019. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk bias included in the study.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 473 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that the time of loss of consciousness significantly reduced (MD=-38.27, 95% CI (-41.77, -34.77), p < 0.00001) and the recovery time significantly reduced (MD=-12.29, 95% CI (-2.77, -1.80), p < 0.00001) in the sevoflurane combined with propofol group compared with the control group. In terms of safety, the heart rate was slower [MD=-11.00, 95% CI (-21.64, -0.36), p=0.04 < 0.05] and the incidence of cough and breath holding was lower [MD=0.38, 95% CI (0.19, 0.78), p=0.008] in the sevoflurane combined with propofol group than in the control group. However, no significant difference in respiratory rate and SPO 2 < 90% was found between the two groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Sevoflurane combined with propofol is worth popularizing because of its high anesthetic effect and safety in the removal of tracheal foreign bodies in children. However, given the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions need to be verified by high-quality studies.