Desflurane versus propofol in post-operative quality of recovery of patients undergoing day laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Prospective, comparative, non-inferiority study

Description of the Content and Quality of Publicly Available Information on the Internet About Inhaled Volatile Anesthesia and Total Intravenous Anesthesia: Descriptive Study

BACKGROUND

More than 300 million patients undergo surgical procedures requiring anesthesia worldwide annually. There are 2 standard-of-care general anesthesia administration options: inhaled volatile anesthesia (INVA) and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). There is limited evidence comparing these methods and their impact on patient experiences and outcomes. Patients often seek this information from sources such as the internet. However, the majority of websites on anesthesia-related topics are not comprehensive, updated, and fully accurate. The quality and availability of web-based patient information about INVA and TIVA have not been sufficiently examined.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to (1) assess information on the internet about INVA and TIVA for availability, readability, accuracy, and quality and (2) identify high-quality websites that can be recommended to patients to assist in their anesthesia information-seeking and decision-making.

METHODS

Web-based searches were conducted using Google from April 2022 to November 2022. Websites were coded using a coding instrument developed based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards criteria and adapted to be appropriate for assessing websites describing INVA and TIVA. Readability was calculated with the Flesch-Kincaid (F-K) grade level and the simple measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) readability formula.

RESULTS

A total of 67 websites containing 201 individual web pages were included for coding and analysis. Most of the websites provided a basic definition of general anesthesia (unconsciousness, n=57, 85%; analgesia, n=47, 70%). Around half of the websites described common side effects of general anesthesia, while fewer described the rare but serious adverse events, such as intraoperative awareness (n=31, 46%), allergic reactions or anaphylaxis (n=29, 43%), and malignant hyperthermia (n=18, 27%). Of the 67 websites, the median F-K grade level was 11.3 (IQR 9.5-12.8) and the median SMOG score was 13.5 (IQR 12.2-14.4), both far above the American Medical Association (AMA) recommended reading level of sixth grade. A total of 51 (76%) websites distinguished INVA versus TIVA as general anesthesia options. A total of 12 of the 51 (24%) websites explicitly stated that there is a decision to be considered about receiving INVA versus TIVA for general anesthesia. Only 10 (20%) websites made any direct comparisons between INVA and TIVA, discussing their positive and negative features. A total of 12 (24%) websites addressed the concept of shared decision-making in planning anesthesia care, but none specifically asked patients to think about which features of INVA and TIVA matter the most to them.

CONCLUSIONS

While the majority of websites described INVA and TIVA, few provided comparisons. There is a need for high-quality patient education and decision support about the choice of INVA versus TIVA to provide accurate and more comprehensive information in a format conducive to patient understanding.

Postoperative recovery: how and when is it assessed: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus about the type of instrument with which to assess postoperative recovery or the time points when assessments are most appropriate. It is also unclear whether instruments measure the four dimensions of postoperative recovery, that is physical, psychological, social, and habitual recovery. This scoping review had three objectives: (1) to identify and describe instruments used in clinical trials to assess postoperative recovery; (2) to determine how, when, and the number of times postoperative recovery was measured; and (3) to explore whether the four dimensions of postoperative recovery are represented in the identified instruments.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. The search terms were related to three search strands: postoperative recovery, instrument, and clinical trials. The limits were English language and publication January 2010 to November 2021. In total, 5015 studies were identified.

RESULTS

A total of 198 studies were included in the results. We identified 20 instruments measuring postoperative recovery. Different versions of Quality of Recovery represented 81.8% of the included instruments. Postoperative recovery was often assessed at one time point (47.2%) and most often on postoperative day 1 (81.5%). Thirteen instruments had items covering all four dimensions of postoperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing recovery is important to evaluate and improve perioperative care. We emphasise the importance of choosing the right instrument for the concept studied and, if postoperative recovery is of interest, of assessing more than once. Ideally, instruments should include all four dimensions to cover the whole recovery process.

Effect of total intravenous anesthesia or inhalation anesthesia on postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or sevoflurane-based inhalation anesthesia on postoperative quality of recovery in patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

An operating room, a postoperative recovery area, and a hospital ward.

PATIENTS

A total of 102 female patients scheduled for elective total laparoscopic hysterectomy were randomly divided into two groups: the propofol group (group P) or sevoflurane group (group S).

INTERVENTIONS

Anesthesia in group P was induced by propofol, fentanyl and rocuronium, and maintained by intravenous infusion of propofol and remifentanil. Anesthesia in group S was induced by a tidal volume inhalation technique with sevoflurane and rocuronium and maintained with sevoflurane and remifentanil. Patients in group P did not receive any volatile drugs.

MEASUREMENTS

Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores were assessed at 8, 24, 48, 72 h, 7 days and 30 days after surgery. Intraoperative hemodynamics, postoperative inflammatory indicators and adverse reactions were also recorded.

MAIN RESULTS

The QoR-40 score and its 5 dimensions were similar in the two groups at each point in time (P > 0.05). Group S had less consumption of remifentanil (P < 0.001) but increased use of phenylephrine (P = 0.001) intraoperatively. PSQI scores were also comparable between groups at each point in time (P > 0.05). NRS scores at 72 h (P = 0.023) and 7 days (P = 0.017) after surgery, postoperative NLR (P = 0.024) and hs-CRP (P = 0.042), and the incidence of abdominal distension (P = 0.017) were significantly lower in group P than in group S. Multiple linear regression analyses demonstrated that duration of pneumoperitoneum and sleep quality were associated with postoperative recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of intravenous or inhalation maintenance anesthesia did not affect overall postoperative recovery as measured by the QoR-40 in patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Reducing the duration of pneumoperitoneum and improving sleep quality were conducive to postoperative recovery.

Intravenously injected lidocaine or magnesium improves the quality of early recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Previous data show that lidocaine or magnesium has unique characteristics of stress inhibition and antiinflammation.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to observe the effects of lidocaine or magnesium on the quality of recovery (QoR) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

DESIGN

Single-centre, prospective, randomised, double-blind study.

SETTING

The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University from March 2019 to October 2019.

PATIENTS

One hundred and fourteen patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

INTERVENTION

The enrolled patients were randomly divided into three groups. Lidocaine (group L), magnesium sulphate (group M) or 0.9% saline (group C) was administered intravenously 10 min before induction.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The quality of recovery 15 (QoR-15) score, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score were selected. The usage of propofol and remifentanil, haemodynamic parameters, anaesthesia recovery parameters and adverse events were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The QoR-15 scores for group L (132.0) and group M (134.0) were 6 and 8 points higher than that of group C (126.0) on POD1 (postoperative day 1) (adjP < 0.05). However, the decrease of QoR-15 in Group L is less than the minimal clinically important difference (8).The NRS scores on POD1 in group C 3, were higher than other two groups (adjP < 0.05). The dosage of remifentanil in group L was lower than other two groups (adjP < 0.05).The physical independence of group L and group M and physical comfort of group M were improved compared with group C.

CONCLUSION

The results show that magnesium sulphate improved the QoR through improving physical comfort and physical independence in patients after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, lidocaine had limited effects on QoR under current conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1800019092 (www.chictr.org.cn).

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY URL

The study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trials Register (ChiCTR1800019092) https://www.chictr.org.cn.

Inhalational versus intravenous maintenance of anesthesia for quality of recovery in patients undergoing corrective lower limb osteotomy: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Inhalational anesthesia and propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) are the two most popular methods of general anesthesia with distinct characteristics that may affect quality of recovery (QOR) differently. This study compared QOR after corrective lower limb osteotomy between desflurane-based inhalational anesthesia and propofol-based TIVA.

METHODS

Sixty-eight patients, ASA class I or II who underwent corrective lower limb osteotomy were randomized to receive either desflurane anesthesia or propofol TIVA. The primary outcome was quality of recovery 40 (QoR-40) questionnaire scores on postoperative day (POD) 1 and 2. Postoperative nausea scores, antiemetic requirements, and amount of opioid consumption via intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) were assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Global QoR-40 scores on POD 1 (153.5 (140.3, 171.3) vs. 140.0 (120.0, 173.0), P = 0.056, 95% CI; -22.5, 0.2) and POD 2 (155.5 (146.8, 175.5) vs. 152.0 (134.0, 179.0), P = 0.209, 95% CI; -17.5, 3.9) were comparable between the two groups. Among the five dimensions of QoR-40, physical independence scores were significantly higher in the TIVA group compared to the Desflurane group on POD both 1 and 2. Nausea scores (0.0 (0.0, 0.0) vs. 1.0 (0.0, 3.5), P < 0.001) and number of patients requiring rescue antiemetics (0% vs. 15.2%, P = 0.017) were significantly lower in the TIVA group at the post anesthesia care unit (PACU). Although the number of bolus attempts between 0-24 h and the morphine equivalent dose of analgesics administered via IV PCA between 12-24 h were significantly less in the TIVA group compared to the Desflurane group, there was no significant difference between groups for the overall 48 h postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol-based TIVA did not improve global QoR-40 scores compared with desflurane-based inhalational anesthesia. However, considering the better QoR-40 scores in the domain of physical independence and less nausea in the early postoperative period, propofol TIVA should be considered as a useful option in patients undergoing corrective lower limb osteotomy.

Inhalation of low-dose desflurane prevents the hemodynamic instability caused by target-controlled infusion of remifentanil and propofol during laparoscopic gynecological surgery: A randomized controlled trial

The objective of the present study was to determine whether the addition of inhaled desflurane is superior to remifentanil-propofol total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) alone in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery. A total of 60 patients who were scheduled to undergo laparoscopic gynecological surgery were prospectively enrolled and randomly allocated to receive either propofol-remifentanil (PR group; n=30) or combined propofol-remifentanil and low-dose desflurane (PRD group; n=30) for the maintenance of anesthesia. Hemodynamics [mean arterial pressure (MAP); heart rate (HR)], recovery parameters and complications were recorded. The results of the present study indicated that the addition of desflurane significantly reduced the amount of propofol and remifentanil that was administered in the PRD group, compared with that in the PR group. MAP and HR were significantly higher at T3 (5 min post-pneumoperitoneum), but significantly lower at T4 (removal of pneumoperitoneum needle) and T5 (post-operation immediately) in the PR group, compared with the PRD group. Moreover, MAP and HR were significantly altered at multiple time points within the PR group; however, they were relatively stable in the PRD group. There were no significant differences in the recovery parameters and complications between the two groups. In conclusion, combining low-dose desflurane with PR may represent an efficient anesthesia regimen to prevent the hemodynamic instability of TIVA in patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery.

Impact of Local Infiltration Analgesia on the Quality of Recovery After Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized, Triple-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) is commonly used in anterior total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery; however, evidence for its efficacy is lacking. We hypothesized that LIA with 0.2% ropivacaine when compared with injection of placebo (0.9% saline) would improve patient quality of recovery on postoperative day (POD) 1, as measured by the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score.

METHODS

Patients scheduled to have a primary unilateral anterior THA with a single surgeon in a tertiary level metropolitan hospital were randomized to receive LIA with either 2.5 mL/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.9% saline as placebo. Patients and clinical and study personnel were blinded to group allocation. Perioperative care was standardized and this included spinal anesthesia and oral multimodal analgesia. The primary outcome was a multidimensional (pain, physical comfort, physical independence, emotions, and psychological support) patient-reported quality of recovery scale, QoR-15, measured on POD 1.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty patients were randomized; 6 patients were withdrawn after randomization and 2 patients had incomplete outcome data. The intention-to-treat analysis included 152 patients. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) QoR-15 score on POD 1 of the ropivacaine group was 119.5 (102-124), compared with the placebo group which had a median (IQR) of 115 (98-126). The median difference of 2 (95% confidence interval [CI], -4 to 7; P = .56) was not statistically or clinically significant. An as-per-protocol sensitivity analysis of 146 patients who received spinal anesthesia without general anesthesia, and the allocated intervention, also showed no evidence of a significant difference between groups. Secondary outcomes (worst pain numerical rating scale at rest and with movement on POD 1, opioid consumption on PODs 1 and 2, mobilization on POD 1, Brief Pain Inventory severity and interference on POD 90, and length of stay) were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LIA with 0.2% ropivacaine when compared with 0.9% saline as placebo did not improve quality of recovery 1 day after anterior THA.