Pharmacological strategies to prevent haemodynamic changes after intubation in parturient women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: A network meta-analysis.

Objective : This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to determine the relative efficacy and safety of pharmacological strategies used to mitigate haemodynamic instability by intubation for general anaesthesia in hypertensive parturient women undergoing caesarean section. Methods : We considered randomised controlled studies comparing the effects of pharmacological strategies used to alleviate haemodynamic instability during intubation in parturient women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. The primary endpoints were maximum blood pressure and heart rate after intubation, and secondary endpoints were the Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min. NMA allowed us to combine direct and indirect comparisons between strategies. Results : Twelve studies evaluating nine pharmacological strategies in 619 patients were included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, the maximal mean arterial pressure was lowest for high-dose remifentanil (99.4%) followed by nitroglycerin (73.6%) and labetalol (60.9%). The maximal heart rate was lowest for labetalol (99.9%) followed by high dose of remifentanil (81.2%) and fentanyl (61.6%). Apgar score at 1 min was higher with low-dose than with high-dose remifentanil (mean difference, 0.726; 95% confidence interval, 0.056 to 1.396; I2=0.0%). Conclusions : High-dose remifentanil produces minimum blood pressure changes, while labetalol is most effective in maintaining normal heart rate in parturient women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy during caesarean section under general anaesthesia.

Pharmacological intervention for ambulatory surgery: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aim to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to quantify and rank-order the efficacy and safety of analgesic medications for ambulatory surgery. METHODS: We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of analgesics, beginning from their inception to February 2020. The primary endpoints will be pain score measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) or a numerical rating scale (NRS) at 3 different time points: Phase I recovery, phase II recovery, and recovery at home. Adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, headache, dizziness, arrhythmia, and respiratory depression, will be also assessed.We will conduct NMA and use surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values and rankograms to present the hierarchy of analgesic medication. A comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to assess the presence of small study effects. The quality of the included studies will be assessed using the risk of bias tool 2.0. All statistical analyses will be performed using Stata SE version 15.0. RESULTS: The results of this systematic review and NMA will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and NMA will provide comprehensive and convincing evidence regarding analgesic medication for pain after ambulatory surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018100000.

Comparison of procedural sequence in same-day bidirectional endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of procedural sequence in same-day bidirectional endoscopy. METHODS: We searched OVID-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the procedural sequences in same-day bidirectional endoscopy, including esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy. The sedative and analgesic doses required, discomfort and satisfaction scores, procedure time, recovery time, adenoma detection rate, and failed cecal intubation were evaluated. Adverse effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular complications, were also assessed. RESULTS: We included six studies, with 1,848 patients in total. The requirement for sedative treatment was significantly lesser in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.54 to -0.24; p = 0.12; I2 = 49%). Discomfort, scored by patients during the EGD procedure, was significantly lesser in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (SMD, -0.45; 95% CI, -0.80 to -0.09; p = 0.02; I2 = 73%), while it was comparable during colonoscopy between the two sequences. Recovery time was significantly shorter in the EGD-colonoscopy sequence than in the colonoscopy-EGD sequence (SMD, -0.47; 95% CI, -0.65 to -0.30; p = 0.28; I2 = 21%). Total procedure duration, EGD, colonoscopy, cecal intubation time and incidence, incidences of pathologic findings, and adenoma detection were comparable between the two sequences. There was no significant difference in the incidences of desaturation, hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia, and tachycardia between the two sequences. CONCLUSION: When conducting same-day bidirectional endoscopy, EGD followed by colonoscopy is the most beneficial sequence to be used because patients require lower sedative doses, recover faster, and report lesser discomfort.

Pharmacological interventions for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adult patients undergoing ambulatory surgery: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of published studies to comprehensively compare and rank the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting after ambulatory surgery. METHODS: A systematic and comprehensive search will be performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases, beginning from their inceptions to July and August 2019. Only randomized clinical trials on the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting after ambulatory surgery will be included.The primary endpoints will be the incidences of postoperative nausea (PON), postoperative vomiting (POV), and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in the following recovery phases: before discharge (recovery phase I and II), after discharge but within 24 hours following surgery, and after discharge, after the initial 24-hour postoperative period.The incidences of delayed post-discharge nausea, post-discharge vomiting, and post-discharge nausea and vomiting, which occur after the initial 24-hour postoperative period, severities of PON, POV, and PONV, use of rescue antiemetics, and the incidence of complete response, as well as safety issues, including complications, such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness, will be also assessed.We will conduct both pairwise meta-analysis and NMA. We will use surface under the cumulative ranking curve values and rankograms to present the hierarchy of the pharmacologic interventions. A comparison-adjusted funnel plot will be used to assess the presence of small-study effects. The quality of the studies included will be assessed using the risk of bias tool 2.0. All statistical analyses will be performed using Stata SE, version 15.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). RESULTS: The results of this systematic review and NMA will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and NMA will provide comprehensive and convincing evidence summarizing the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting after ambulatory surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018103068.