Welcome to Open Science
Contact Us
Home Books Journals Submission Open Science Join Us News
Clinical Impact of Deep Versus Moderate Neuromuscular Block for Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Current Issue
Volume 6, 2019
Issue 2 (June)
Pages: 59-67   |   Vol. 6, No. 2, June 2019   |   Follow on         
Paper in PDF Downloads: 39   Since Apr. 26, 2019 Views: 809   Since Apr. 26, 2019
Authors
[1]
Lucas Ferreira Gomes Pereira, University Centre of Volta Redonda - UniFOA, Volta Redonda, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
[2]
Regina El Dib, Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada; Department of Biosciences and Oral Diagnosis, Institute of Science and Technology, UNESP – São Paulo State University, São Paulo, São José dos Campos, Brazil; McMaster Institute of Urology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
[3]
Carlos Darcy Alves Bersot, Department of Anesthesiology, Lagoa Federal Hospital, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
[4]
José Eduardo Guimarães Pereira, Department of Anesthesiology, Botucatu Medical School, UNESP – São Paulo State University, São Paulo, Brazil; Department of Anesthesiology, EsSEx, Army Central Hospital, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; Department of Anesthesiology, Barra Mansa Wholy House of Mercy Hospital, Barra Mansa, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis were designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of deep (DNMB) versus moderate (MNMB) neuromuscular block on the treatment of patients submitted to bariatric surgery. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched from inception to December 2017 in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, COCHRANE, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS. Reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles, extracted data from included studies and assessed their risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to rate overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Two RCTs including 160 participants proved eligible, and their results yielded a statistically significant improvement on surgical field quality according to the Leiden-Surgical Rating Scale (L-SRS) with the use of DNMB compared to MNMB (MD 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75; participants = 160; studies = 2; I2 = 16%; p < 0.00001). Results from one RCT yielded a statistically significant reduction in pain scores at the post-anesthesia care unit (MD -0.50, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.29; participants = 100; studies = 1; p < 0.00001) and in referred shoulder pain at the surgical ward (MD -0.50, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.36; participants = 100; studies = 1; p < 0.00001) with the use of DNMB compared to MNMB. There was no increase in adverse outcomes detected. The quality of evidence was rated as very-low for both outcomes.
Keywords
Anesthesia, Neuromuscular Blocking, Bariatric Surgery, Deep Neuromuscular Block, Moderate Neuromuscular Block
Reference
[1]
English WJ, DeMaria EJ, Brethauer SA, et al. American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery estimation of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States in 2016. Surg Obes Relat Dis; 2018; 14: 259.
[2]
CHAIM, Elinton Adami, et al. "Preoperative multidisciplinary program for bariatric surgery: a proposal for the Brazilian Public Health System." Arquivos de gastroenterologia 2017; 54.1, 70-74.
[3]
Neudecker J, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E, et al. The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery clinical practice guideline on the pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2002; 16: 1121–1143.
[4]
Gurusamy KS, Samraj K, Davidson BR. Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009, Issue 2.
[5]
Nguyen NT, Anderson JT, Budd M, et al. Effects of pneumoperitoneum on intraoperative pulmonary mechanics and gas exchange during laparoscopic gastric bypass. Surg Endosc. 2004; 18: 64–71.
[6]
Dorsay DA, Greene FL, Baysinger CL. Hemodynamic changes during laparoscopic cholecystectomy monitored with transesophageal echocardiography. Surg Endosc. 1995; 9: 128-134.
[7]
Dubois PE, Putz L, Jamart J, et al. Deep neuromuscular block improves surgical conditions during laparoscopic hysterectomy A randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014; 31: 430–436.
[8]
Bruintjes, M. H., et al. "Deep neuromuscular block to optimize surgical space conditions during laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis." British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2017; 118.6: 834-842.
[9]
Hua J, Gong J, Yao L, et al. Low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. 2014; 208: 143–150.
[10]
Joshipura VP, Haribhakti SP, Patel NR, et al. A prospective randomized, controlled study comparing low pressure versus high pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2009; 19: 234–240.
[11]
Sandhu T, Yamada S, Ariyakachon V, et al. Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum versus standard pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a prospective randomized clinical trial. Surg Endosc. 2009; 23: 1044–1047.
[12]
Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed: 03.01.2018.
[13]
Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011; 343: d5928.
[14]
Guyatt GH, Busse JW. Modification of Cochrane tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials. Distiller SR. 2016. Available: http://distillercer.com/resources/. Accessed; 03.26.2018.
[15]
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 407–415.
[16]
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines: 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1283–1293.
[17]
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1294–1302.
[18]
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guide- lines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1303–1310.
[19]
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Montori V, et al. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1277–1282.
[20]
Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program]. Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
[21]
Baete S, Vercruysse G, Laenen MV, et al. The Effect of Deep Versus Moderate Neuromuscular Block on Surgical Conditions and Postoperative Respiratory Function in Bariatric Laparoscopic Surgery: A Randomized, Double Blind Clinical Trial. Anesth Analg. 2017; 124: 1469-1475.
[22]
Torensma B, Martini CH, Boon M, et al. Deep Neuromuscular Block Improves Surgical Conditions during Bariatric Surgery and Reduces Postoperative Pain: A Randomized Double Blind Controlled Trial. PLoS One. 2016; 11: e0167907.
Open Science Scholarly Journals
Open Science is a peer-reviewed platform, the journals of which cover a wide range of academic disciplines and serve the world's research and scholarly communities. Upon acceptance, Open Science Journals will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download.
CONTACT US
Office Address:
228 Park Ave., S#45956, New York, NY 10003
Phone: +(001)(347)535 0661
E-mail:
LET'S GET IN TOUCH
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message
SEND MASSAGE
Copyright © 2013-, Open Science Publishers - All Rights Reserved