Clinical efficacy of xenon versus propofol: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Issue 20 (May 2018)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Clinical efficacy of xenon versus propofol: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Issue 20 (May 2018)
- Main Title:
- Clinical efficacy of xenon versus propofol
- Authors:
- Xia, Yimeng
Fang, Hongwei
Xu, Jindong
Jia, Chenfei
Tao, Guorong
Yu, Buwei - Other Names:
- Ting. Chien-Kun section editor.
- Abstract:
- Abstract: Background: Interest in the anesthetic use of xenon, a noble gas, has waxed and waned for decades, and the clinical effects of xenon are still debated. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of xenon with that of propofol. Methods: Electronic searches were performed through December 2017 using various databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We identified thirteen trials that included a total of 817 patients. Results: Patients treated with xenon had a lower bispectral index (BIS) (weighted mean difference (WMD): −6.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): −11.33 to −1.18, P = .02), a higher mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (WMD: 7.00, 95% CI: 2.32–11.68, P = .003) and a lower heart rate (HR) (WMD: −9.45, 95% CI: −12.28 to −6.63, P < 0.00001) than propofol-treated patients. However, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups in the effects of nondepolarizing muscular relaxants, the duration spent in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (WMD: −0.94, 95% CI: −8.79–6.91, P = .81), or the incidence of perioperative complications [assessed using the outcomes of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (relative risk (RR): 2.01, 95% CI: 0.79–5.11, P = .14), hypotension (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.40, P = .25), hypertension (RR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.73–2.21, P = .39) and bradycardia (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.36–2.74, P = 1.00)]. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we found thatAbstract: Background: Interest in the anesthetic use of xenon, a noble gas, has waxed and waned for decades, and the clinical effects of xenon are still debated. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of xenon with that of propofol. Methods: Electronic searches were performed through December 2017 using various databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We identified thirteen trials that included a total of 817 patients. Results: Patients treated with xenon had a lower bispectral index (BIS) (weighted mean difference (WMD): −6.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): −11.33 to −1.18, P = .02), a higher mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (WMD: 7.00, 95% CI: 2.32–11.68, P = .003) and a lower heart rate (HR) (WMD: −9.45, 95% CI: −12.28 to −6.63, P < 0.00001) than propofol-treated patients. However, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups in the effects of nondepolarizing muscular relaxants, the duration spent in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (WMD: −0.94, 95% CI: −8.79–6.91, P = .81), or the incidence of perioperative complications [assessed using the outcomes of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (relative risk (RR): 2.01, 95% CI: 0.79–5.11, P = .14), hypotension (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.40, P = .25), hypertension (RR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.73–2.21, P = .39) and bradycardia (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.36–2.74, P = 1.00)]. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we found that xenon treatment resulted in a higher MAP, a lower HR, and a smaller BIS index than treatment with propofol. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Medicine. Volume 97:Issue 20(2018)
- Journal:
- Medicine
- Issue:
- Volume 97:Issue 20(2018)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 97, Issue 20 (2018)
- Year:
- 2018
- Volume:
- 97
- Issue:
- 20
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2018-0097-0020-0000
- Page Start:
- Page End:
- Publication Date:
- 2018-05
- Subjects:
- general anesthetics -- meta-analysis -- propofol -- randomized controlled trials -- xenon
Medicine -- Periodicals
Medicine -- Periodicals
Médecine -- Périodiques
Geneeskunde
Medicine
Periodicals
Periodicals
610.5 - Journal URLs:
- http://journals.lww.com/md-journal/pages/default.aspx ↗
http://gateway.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=toc&D=ovft&MODE=ovid&NEWS=N&AN=00002060-000000000-00000 ↗
http://journals.lww.com ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1097/MD.0000000000010758 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0025-7974
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 5534.000000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library STI - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 6907.xml