Anaesthesia
-
Review Meta Analysis
Systematic review of the literature for the use of oesophageal Doppler monitor for fluid replacement in major abdominal surgery.
The use of intra-operative Doppler oesophageal probes provides continuous monitoring of cardiac output. This enables optimisation of intravascular volume and tissue perfusion in major abdominal surgery, which is thought to reduce postoperative complications and shorten hospital stay. Medline and EMBASE were searched using the standard methodology of the Cochrane collaboration for trials that compared oesophageal Doppler monitoring with conventional clinical parameters for fluid replacement in patients undergoing major elective abdominal surgery. ⋯ Overall, there were fewer complications and ICU admissions, and less requirement for inotropes in the intervention group. Return of normal gastro-intestinal function was also significantly faster in the intervention group. Oesophageal Doppler use for monitoring and optimisation of flow-related haemodynamic variables improves short-term outcome in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Dexmedetomidine and cardiac protection for non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
We conducted a systematic review of the effects of dexmedetomidine on cardiac outcomes following non-cardiac surgery. We included prospective, randomised peri-operative studies of dexmedetomidine that reported mortality, cardiac morbidity or adverse drug events. A PubMed Central and EMBASE search was conducted up to July 2007. ⋯ Peri-operative hypotension (26%, OR 3.80, 95% CI 1.91-7.54, p = 0.0001) and bradycardia (17%, OR 5.45, 95% CI 2.98-9.95, p < 0.00001) were significantly increased. An anticholinergic did not reduce the incidence of bradycardia (p = 0.43). A randomised placebo-controlled trial of dexmedetomidine is warranted.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Randomised crossover comparison of the Ambu AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask with the LMA Classic laryngeal mask airway in paralysed anaesthetised patients.
We compared the performance of the Ambu AuraOnce Laryngeal Mask with that of the LMA Classic laryngeal mask airway during controlled anaesthesia. Forty patients requiring intermittent positive pressure ventilation were studied using a randomised crossover design. ⋯ Insertion of the Ambu Laryngeal Mask required more manipulations to achieve a patent airway than did the LMA Classic (6 (15%) vs 1 (2.5%), respectively; p = 0.045), but the time taken for insertion was similar between the two groups. The incidence of trauma, grade of fibreoptic view, peak airway pressure and quality of ventilation during maintenance of anaesthesia were similar in both groups.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Airtraq vs standard laryngoscopy by student paramedics and experienced prehospital laryngoscopists managing a model of difficult intubation.
Two consecutive, randomised, cross-over trials compared intubation success rates in third-year paramedic students and experienced prehospital practitioners using the Airtraq or a Macintosh laryngoscope with flexible stylet in a manikin model of a Cormack and Lehane grade III/IV laryngoscopic view. First-time intubation rates for the Macintosh and Airtraq for students were 0/23 (0%) vs 10/23 (44%) (44% difference, 95% CI 26-63%, p < 0.001) and for experienced laryngoscopists were 14/56 (25%) vs 47/56 (84%) (59% difference, 95% CI 42-72%, p < 0.0001), respectively. First-time oesophageal intubation rates for students were 15/23 (65%) vs 3/23 (13%) (-52% difference, 95% CI -25 to -72%, p < 0.001) and for experienced practitioners 9/56 (16%) vs 0/56 (0%) (-16% difference, 95% CI -9 to -28%, p = 0.0014). Student paramedics and experienced prehospital laryngoscopists managing a manikin model of a grade III/IV view had increased first-time intubation rates and had lower rates of oesophageal intubation with the Airtraq compared with a standard laryngoscope.