术中脑电图爆发抑制与术后谵妄之间的关系:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 9.1 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Sun-Kyung Park, Dong Woo Han, Chul Ho Chang, Hyunjoo Jung, Hyun Kang, Young Song
{"title":"术中脑电图爆发抑制与术后谵妄之间的关系:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Sun-Kyung Park, Dong Woo Han, Chul Ho Chang, Hyunjoo Jung, Hyun Kang, Young Song","doi":"10.1097/ALN.0000000000005255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electroencephalogram burst suppression can be associated with postoperative delirium; however, the results of relevant studies are discrepant. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between intraoperative burst suppression and postoperative delirium in adult surgical patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched and updated in May 2023. We included cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized-controlled studies reporting on postoperative delirium incidence with documented intraoperative burst suppression in adults receiving general anesthesia for any surgery. The primary outcome was the pooled odds ratio (OR) for postoperative delirium in cases with intraoperative burst suppression compared to those without burst suppression, calculated using a random-effects model. Two independent investigators extracted the data. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022326479); the results were reported according to PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies (6435 patients) were included in the analysis. The overall incidence of postoperative delirium was 21.1% (1358/6435). Patients with intraoperative burst suppression had a higher incidence of postoperative delirium than those without burst suppression (pooled OR, 1.492; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.022-2.178]; I2 =44%; 95% CI [0%-75%]; τ2 = 0.110). The intraoperative duration of burst suppression was significantly longer in patients who developed postoperative delirium (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.462 [95% CI, 0.293-0.632]; I2 = 63%; 95% CI [16%-84%]; τ2 = 0.027). The burst suppression ratio was significantly higher in the delirium group (SMD 0.150; 95% CI [0.055-0.245]; I2 = 0%; 95% CI [0%-85%]; τ2 = 0.00).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our meta-analysis suggests an association between intraoperative burst suppression and postoperative delirium; however, the quality of evidence was very low. The limited number of studies and substantial heterogeneity across them emphasize the need for further high-quality studies to establish a more robust conclusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":7970,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association between intraoperative electroencephalogram burst suppression and postoperative delirium: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sun-Kyung Park, Dong Woo Han, Chul Ho Chang, Hyunjoo Jung, Hyun Kang, Young Song\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ALN.0000000000005255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electroencephalogram burst suppression can be associated with postoperative delirium; however, the results of relevant studies are discrepant. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between intraoperative burst suppression and postoperative delirium in adult surgical patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched and updated in May 2023. We included cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized-controlled studies reporting on postoperative delirium incidence with documented intraoperative burst suppression in adults receiving general anesthesia for any surgery. The primary outcome was the pooled odds ratio (OR) for postoperative delirium in cases with intraoperative burst suppression compared to those without burst suppression, calculated using a random-effects model. Two independent investigators extracted the data. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022326479); the results were reported according to PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies (6435 patients) were included in the analysis. The overall incidence of postoperative delirium was 21.1% (1358/6435). Patients with intraoperative burst suppression had a higher incidence of postoperative delirium than those without burst suppression (pooled OR, 1.492; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.022-2.178]; I2 =44%; 95% CI [0%-75%]; τ2 = 0.110). The intraoperative duration of burst suppression was significantly longer in patients who developed postoperative delirium (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.462 [95% CI, 0.293-0.632]; I2 = 63%; 95% CI [16%-84%]; τ2 = 0.027). The burst suppression ratio was significantly higher in the delirium group (SMD 0.150; 95% CI [0.055-0.245]; I2 = 0%; 95% CI [0%-85%]; τ2 = 0.00).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our meta-analysis suggests an association between intraoperative burst suppression and postoperative delirium; however, the quality of evidence was very low. The limited number of studies and substantial heterogeneity across them emphasize the need for further high-quality studies to establish a more robust conclusion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000005255\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000005255","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:脑电图猝发抑制可能与术后谵妄有关;然而,相关研究的结果并不一致。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估成人手术患者术中突发抑制与术后谵妄之间的关系:方法:系统检索了 PubMed、MEDLINE、Embase、Google Scholar 和 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,并于 2023 年 5 月进行了更新。我们纳入了队列研究、病例对照研究和随机对照研究,这些研究报告了在任何手术中接受全身麻醉的成人术后谵妄发生率,并记录了术中猝灭抑制。主要研究结果是采用随机效应模型计算出的有术中爆破抑制的病例与无爆破抑制的病例术后谵妄发生率的汇总几率比(OR)。两名独立研究人员提取了数据。研究方案在PROSPERO进行了前瞻性注册(注册号:CRD42022326479);结果按照PRISMA指南进行报告:结果:14项研究(6435名患者)被纳入分析。术后谵妄的总发生率为21.1%(1358/6435)。术中使用爆发抑制的患者术后谵妄发生率高于未使用爆发抑制的患者(汇总 OR,1.492;95% 置信区间 (CI)[1.022-2.178];I2 =44%;95% CI [0%-75%];τ2 = 0.110)。术后出现谵妄的患者术中爆发抑制持续时间明显更长(标准化平均差 [SMD] 0.462 [95% CI, 0.293-0.632]; I2 = 63%; 95% CI [16%-84%]; τ2 = 0.027)。谵妄组的爆发抑制比明显更高(SMD 0.150;95% CI [0.055-0.245];I2 = 0%;95% CI [0%-85%];τ2 = 0.00):我们的荟萃分析表明,术中爆发抑制与术后谵妄之间存在关联,但证据质量很低。研究数量有限,且存在大量异质性,因此需要进一步开展高质量的研究,以得出更可靠的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Association between intraoperative electroencephalogram burst suppression and postoperative delirium: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Electroencephalogram burst suppression can be associated with postoperative delirium; however, the results of relevant studies are discrepant. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between intraoperative burst suppression and postoperative delirium in adult surgical patients.

Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched and updated in May 2023. We included cohort studies, case-control studies, and randomized-controlled studies reporting on postoperative delirium incidence with documented intraoperative burst suppression in adults receiving general anesthesia for any surgery. The primary outcome was the pooled odds ratio (OR) for postoperative delirium in cases with intraoperative burst suppression compared to those without burst suppression, calculated using a random-effects model. Two independent investigators extracted the data. The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022326479); the results were reported according to PRISMA guidelines.

Results: Fourteen studies (6435 patients) were included in the analysis. The overall incidence of postoperative delirium was 21.1% (1358/6435). Patients with intraoperative burst suppression had a higher incidence of postoperative delirium than those without burst suppression (pooled OR, 1.492; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.022-2.178]; I2 =44%; 95% CI [0%-75%]; τ2 = 0.110). The intraoperative duration of burst suppression was significantly longer in patients who developed postoperative delirium (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.462 [95% CI, 0.293-0.632]; I2 = 63%; 95% CI [16%-84%]; τ2 = 0.027). The burst suppression ratio was significantly higher in the delirium group (SMD 0.150; 95% CI [0.055-0.245]; I2 = 0%; 95% CI [0%-85%]; τ2 = 0.00).

Conclusion: Our meta-analysis suggests an association between intraoperative burst suppression and postoperative delirium; however, the quality of evidence was very low. The limited number of studies and substantial heterogeneity across them emphasize the need for further high-quality studies to establish a more robust conclusion.

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
Anesthesiology
Anesthesiology 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
542
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: With its establishment in 1940, Anesthesiology has emerged as a prominent leader in the field of anesthesiology, encompassing perioperative, critical care, and pain medicine. As the esteemed journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Anesthesiology operates independently with full editorial freedom. Its distinguished Editorial Board, comprising renowned professionals from across the globe, drives the advancement of the specialty by presenting innovative research through immediate open access to select articles and granting free access to all published articles after a six-month period. Furthermore, Anesthesiology actively promotes groundbreaking studies through an influential press release program. The journal's unwavering commitment lies in the dissemination of exemplary work that enhances clinical practice and revolutionizes the practice of medicine within our discipline.
×
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