Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Inhalational anaesthesia compared with intravenous anaesthesia for adults undergoing transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery

Inhalational anaesthesia compared with intravenous anaesthesia for adults undergoing transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery

Patient or population: adults undergoing transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery
Setting: Training and Research Hospital in Turkey and Univerity Hospital in South Korea
Intervention: inhalational anaesthesia
Comparison: intravenous anaesthesia

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

Number of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with intravenous anaesthesia

Risk with inhalational anaesthesia

Pain in the PACU (VAS)

Mean pain in the PACU (VAS) was 42.9

MD 1 lower
(9.82 lower to 7.82 higher)

62
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa

VAS 0 to 100, with higher score indicating greater pain

Pain at 1 to 6 hours (VAS)

Mean pain from 1 to 6 hours (VAS) was 42.5

MD 2.2 lower
(10.62 lower to 6.22 higher)

62
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa

VAS 0 to 100, with higher score indicating greater pain

Pain at 6 to 24 hours (VAS)

Mean pain from 6 to 24 hours (VAS) was 34.5

MD 1 lower
(7.51 lower to 5.51 higher)

62
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa

VAS 0 to 100, with higher score indicating greater pain

Presence of nausea

Study population

RR 0.39
(0.19 to 0.80)

62
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa

581 per 1000

226 per 1000
(110 to 465)

Nausea intensity (VNRS) in PACU

Mean nausea intensity (VNRS) in PACU was 0.2

MD 0.7 lower
(1.35 lower to 0.05 lower)

62
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa

VNRS 0 to 10: 1 to 3 = mild, 4 to 6 = moderate, 7 to 10 = severe, or with retching and vomition

Nausea intensity (VNRS) at 1 to 6 hours

Mean nausea intensity (VNRS) at 1 to 6 hours was 0.4

MD 1.7 lower
(2.59 lower to 0.81 lower)

62
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa

VNRS 0 to 10: 1 to 3 = mild, 4 to 6 = moderate, 7 to 10 = severe, or with retching and vomition

Nausea‐vomiting rate at 1 hour

Study population

RR 23.00
(1.44 to 366.71)

42
(1 RCT)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOWa,b,c

0 per 1000

0 per 1000
(0 to 0)

Nausea‐vomiting rate at 3 hours

Study population

RR 2.00
(0.20 to 20.41)

42
(1 RCT)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
VERY LOWa,b,c

48 per 1000

95 per 1000
(10 to 972)

Adverse effects: increase in IOP during maintenance of anaesthesia

Mean Increase in IOP during maintenance of anaesthesia was 2.1

MD 3.9 lower
(6.34 lower to 1.46 lower)

66
(1 RCT)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
LOWa,d

No participants experienced ocular complications

No included study reported other adverse events of interest

*Risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on assumed risk in the comparison group and relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: confidence interval; IOP: intraocular pressure; MD: mean difference; OR: odds ratio; RR: risk ratio; VAS: visual analogue scale; VNRS: verbal numerical rating scale.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to the estimate of effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of effect but may be substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

aFew participants.

bUnclear allocation concealment and blinding.

cPower calculation for the study performed on mean difference in pH between groups and minimal relevant difference not stated; primary outcomes: heart rate, mean atrial pressure and values for oxygen and carbon dioxide.

dAddresses a restricted version of the review question.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Inhalational anaesthesia compared with intravenous anaesthesia for adults undergoing transabdominal robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery
Table 1. Effect estimates for single studies

Outcome

Study/Participant

Statistical method

Effect estimate [95% CI]

P value

Pain in the PACU (VAS)

1/n = 62

MD

‐1.00 [‐9.82 to 7.82]

0.82

Pain at 1 to 6 hours (VAS)

1/n = 62

MD

‐2.20 [‐10.62 to 6.22]

0.61

Pain at 6 to 24 hours (VAS)

1/n = 62

MD

‐1.00 [‐7.51 to 5.51]

0.76

Presence of nausea

1/n = 62

RR

0.39 [0.19 to 0.80]

0.01

Nausea intensity in PACU (VNRS)

1/n = 62

MD

‐0.70 [‐1.35 to ‐0.05]

0.03

Nausea intensity at 1 to 6 hours (VNRS)

1/n = 62

MD

‐1.70 [‐2.59 to ‐0.81]

0.0002

Nausea‐vomiting rate at 1 hour

1/n = 42

RR

23.00 [1.44 to 366.71]

0.03

Nausea‐vomiting rate at 3 hours

1/n = 42

RR

2.00 [0.20 to 20.41]

0.56

Adverse events: increase in IOP during maintenance of anaesthesia

1/n = 66

MD

‐3.90 [‐6.34 to ‐1.46]

0.002

CI: confidence interval; IOP: intraocular pressure; MD: mean difference; PACU: post‐anaesthesia care unit; RR: risk ratio; VAS: visual analogue scale; VNRS: verbal numerical rating scale.

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Effect estimates for single studies