腺样体切除术中喉罩气道的安全性:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Sami Khoury, Dorsa Zabihi-Pour, Jacob Davidson, Raju Poolacherla, Gopakumar Nair, Abhijit Biswas, Peng You, Julie E Strychowsky
{"title":"腺样体切除术中喉罩气道的安全性:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Sami Khoury, Dorsa Zabihi-Pour, Jacob Davidson, Raju Poolacherla, Gopakumar Nair, Abhijit Biswas, Peng You, Julie E Strychowsky","doi":"10.1177/19160216241263851","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adenotonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures worldwide. The current standard for securing the airway in patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy is endotracheal tube (ETT) intubation. Several studies have investigated the use of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in this procedure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of the LMA versus ETT in adenotonsillectomy.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Databases were searched from inception to 2022 for randomized controlled trials and comparative studies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. The primary outcome is the rate of perioperative respiratory adverse events (PRAEs). Secondary outcomes included the rate of conversion to ETT, desaturations, nausea/vomiting, and surgical time. A subgroup analysis, risk of bias, publication bias, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessments were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies were included in the analysis (4176 patients). The mean overall conversion to ETT was 8.36% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.17, 8.54], and for the pediatric group 8.27% (95% CI = 8.08, 8.47). The mean rate of conversion to ETT secondary to complications was 2.89% (95% CI = 2.76, 3.03) while the rest was from poor surgical access. Overall, there was no significant difference in PRAEs [odds ratio (OR) 1.16, 95% CI = 0.60, 2.22], desaturations (OR 0.79, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.64), or minor complications (OR 0.89, 95% CI = 0.50, 1.55). The use of LMA yielded significantly shorter operative time (mean difference -4.38 minutes, 95% CI = -8.28, -0.49) and emergence time (mean difference -4.15 minutes, 95% CI = -5.63, -2.67).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For adenotonsillectomy surgery, LMA is a safe alternative to ETT and requires less operative time. Careful patient selection and judgment of the surgeon and anesthesiologist are necessary, especially given the 8% conversion to ETT rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":16615,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11191617/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Safety of the Laryngeal Mask Airway in Adenotonsillectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sami Khoury, Dorsa Zabihi-Pour, Jacob Davidson, Raju Poolacherla, Gopakumar Nair, Abhijit Biswas, Peng You, Julie E Strychowsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19160216241263851\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adenotonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures worldwide. The current standard for securing the airway in patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy is endotracheal tube (ETT) intubation. Several studies have investigated the use of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in this procedure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of the LMA versus ETT in adenotonsillectomy.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Databases were searched from inception to 2022 for randomized controlled trials and comparative studies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. The primary outcome is the rate of perioperative respiratory adverse events (PRAEs). Secondary outcomes included the rate of conversion to ETT, desaturations, nausea/vomiting, and surgical time. A subgroup analysis, risk of bias, publication bias, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessments were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve studies were included in the analysis (4176 patients). The mean overall conversion to ETT was 8.36% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.17, 8.54], and for the pediatric group 8.27% (95% CI = 8.08, 8.47). The mean rate of conversion to ETT secondary to complications was 2.89% (95% CI = 2.76, 3.03) while the rest was from poor surgical access. Overall, there was no significant difference in PRAEs [odds ratio (OR) 1.16, 95% CI = 0.60, 2.22], desaturations (OR 0.79, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.64), or minor complications (OR 0.89, 95% CI = 0.50, 1.55). The use of LMA yielded significantly shorter operative time (mean difference -4.38 minutes, 95% CI = -8.28, -0.49) and emergence time (mean difference -4.15 minutes, 95% CI = -5.63, -2.67).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For adenotonsillectomy surgery, LMA is a safe alternative to ETT and requires less operative time. Careful patient selection and judgment of the surgeon and anesthesiologist are necessary, especially given the 8% conversion to ETT rate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16615,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11191617/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19160216241263851\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19160216241263851","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:腺扁桃体切除术是全球最常见的外科手术之一。目前,对接受腺扁桃体切除术的患者进行气道保护的标准是气管插管(ETT)。有几项研究调查了喉罩气道(LMA)在该手术中的使用情况。我们进行了一项系统性回顾和荟萃分析,以比较 LMA 与 ETT 在腺扁桃体切除术中的安全性和有效性:方法:在数据库中搜索了从开始到 2022 年的随机对照试验和比较研究。遵循系统综述和元分析首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 指南。主要结果是围手术期呼吸系统不良事件(PRAE)的发生率。次要结果包括转为 ETT 的比率、血饱和度下降、恶心/呕吐和手术时间。此外,还进行了亚组分析、偏倚风险、发表偏倚以及建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)评估:分析共纳入了 12 项研究(4176 名患者)。转为 ETT 的平均总体比例为 8.36% [95% 置信区间 (CI) = 8.17, 8.54],儿科组为 8.27% (95% CI = 8.08, 8.47)。因并发症而转用 ETT 的平均比例为 2.89% (95% CI = 2.76, 3.03),其余则是由于手术通路不畅。总体而言,PRAE[几率比(OR)1.16,95% CI = 0.60,2.22]、血饱和度下降(OR 0.79,95% CI = 0.38,1.64)或轻微并发症(OR 0.89,95% CI = 0.50,1.55)没有明显差异。使用LMA可显著缩短手术时间(平均差异-4.38分钟,95% CI = -8.28,-0.49)和清醒时间(平均差异-4.15分钟,95% CI = -5.63,-2.67):结论:在腺扁桃体切除手术中,LMA 是 ETT 的安全替代品,且所需手术时间更短。特别是考虑到8%的ETT转换率,外科医生和麻醉师有必要谨慎选择患者并做出判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Safety of the Laryngeal Mask Airway in Adenotonsillectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Adenotonsillectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures worldwide. The current standard for securing the airway in patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy is endotracheal tube (ETT) intubation. Several studies have investigated the use of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in this procedure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of the LMA versus ETT in adenotonsillectomy.

Method: Databases were searched from inception to 2022 for randomized controlled trials and comparative studies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. The primary outcome is the rate of perioperative respiratory adverse events (PRAEs). Secondary outcomes included the rate of conversion to ETT, desaturations, nausea/vomiting, and surgical time. A subgroup analysis, risk of bias, publication bias, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessments were also performed.

Results: Twelve studies were included in the analysis (4176 patients). The mean overall conversion to ETT was 8.36% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 8.17, 8.54], and for the pediatric group 8.27% (95% CI = 8.08, 8.47). The mean rate of conversion to ETT secondary to complications was 2.89% (95% CI = 2.76, 3.03) while the rest was from poor surgical access. Overall, there was no significant difference in PRAEs [odds ratio (OR) 1.16, 95% CI = 0.60, 2.22], desaturations (OR 0.79, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.64), or minor complications (OR 0.89, 95% CI = 0.50, 1.55). The use of LMA yielded significantly shorter operative time (mean difference -4.38 minutes, 95% CI = -8.28, -0.49) and emergence time (mean difference -4.15 minutes, 95% CI = -5.63, -2.67).

Conclusion: For adenotonsillectomy surgery, LMA is a safe alternative to ETT and requires less operative time. Careful patient selection and judgment of the surgeon and anesthesiologist are necessary, especially given the 8% conversion to ETT rate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal publishing on all aspects and sub-specialties of otolaryngology-head & neck surgery, including pediatric and geriatric otolaryngology, rhinology & anterior skull base surgery, otology/neurotology, facial plastic & reconstructive surgery, head & neck oncology, and maxillofacial rehabilitation, as well as a broad range of related topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信