Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Total intravenous versus inhalational anesthesia in endoscopic sinus surgery: A meta-analysis.

Laryngoscope 2020 March
OBJECTIVE: Achieving optimal intraoperative surgical field visibility and minimizing blood loss are two important parameters in endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare two total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalational anesthesia (IA) to determine if either conferred superior outcomes of these and other parameters based on randomized control trials (RCTs) only.

METHODS: The recommended Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed, and searches of electronic databases from inception to September 2018 identified 157 articles for screening. Data were extracted and analyzed using meta-analysis of proportions.

RESULTS: In total, we identified 15 RCTs that satisfied our selection criteria. There were 828 ESS cases described, with 391 (47%) and 437 (53%) being managed by TIVA and IA, respectively. Pooled analysis demonstrated significantly superior visibility scores for TIVA compared to IA based on 10-point grading scores (P = 0.049, visual analog scale; P = 0.009, Wormald scale) and 5-point grading scores (P = 0.002, Boezaart scale). Blood loss was significantly less following TIVA (P = 0.003), with no significant difference in intraoperative heart rate (P = 0.70) or mean arterial pressure (P = 0.96). Additionally, duration of surgery (P = 0.16) and anesthesia (P = 0.39) were comparable between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicates that TIVA has the potential to confer superior surgical field visibility and reduce intraoperative blood loss compared to IA in ESS. Currently, there are significant heterogeneity concerns in this meta-analysis, which temper any expectations that either approach is absolutely superior to the other. Caution should be exercised when interpreting these results until further validation can be achieved.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1A Laryngoscope, 130:575-583, 2020.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app