Background: Previous studies have explored the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine on postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) in elderly patients with fracture. However, no systematic review has addressed this issue. Thus, this systematic review investigated the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine on POCD in elderly patients with fracture. Methods: In this study, we searched electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wang Fang and China Science and Technology Journal Database from their initiation to July 1, 2022. We considered randomized controlled trials of dexmedetomidine on POCD in elderly patients with fracture in this study. Primary outcome was measured by mini-mental state examination. Secondary outcomes were measured by total occurrence rate of postoperative cognitive dysfunction, occurrence rate of delirium, visual analogue scale and occurrence rate of adverse events. Results: A total of 10 studies involving 969 elderly patients with fracture are included in this study. Meta-analysis results showed that there were significant differences on mini-mental state examination at 1-day post-surgery [mean difference (MD) = 2.17; random 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06, 3.28; P < .001; I²=98%], 3-day post-surgery (MD = 2.70; random 95% CI, 1.51, 3.89; P < .001; I²=98%), and 7-day post-surgery (MD = 1.21; random 95% CI, 0.50, 1.93; P < .001; I²=86%), total occurrence rate of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (odds ratio [OR] = 0.26; fixed 95% CI, 0.11, 0.60; P = .002; I²= 0%), occurrence rate of delirium (OR = 0.29; fixed 95% CI, 0.11, 0.78; P = .01; I²= 0%), visual analogue scale (MD = −1.23; random 95% CI, −1.74, −0.72; P < .001; I²=95%), and occurrence rate of adverse events (OR = 0.32; fixed 95% CI, 0.20, 0.50; P < .001; I²= 0%) between the 2 groups. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that dexmedetomidine could effectively manage POCD in elderly patients with fracture. However, the overall quality of included trials is not too high. Thus, the present findings should be cautiously referred.
Background: Inguinal hernia repair (IHR) is a common surgical technique performed under regional block anesthesia (RBA). Although previous clinical trials have explored the effectiveness and safety of RBA for IHR, no systematic review has investigated its effectiveness and safety in adult patients with IHR.Methods: This systematic review searched electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wangfang, and VIP) from their inception to July 1, 2022. We included all potential randomized controlled trials that focused on the effects and safety of RBA in adult patients with IHR. Outcomes included operative time, total rescue analgesics, numerical rating scale at 24 hours, occurrence rate of nausea and vomiting, and occurrence rate of urinary retention (ORUCR).Results: Five randomized controlled trials, involving 347 patients with IHR, were included in this study. Meta-analysis results showed that no significant differences were identified on operative time (MD = −0.20; fixed 95% confidence interval [CI], −3.87, 3.47; P = .92; I² = 0%), total rescue analgesics (MD = −8.90; fixed 95% CI, −20.36, 2.56; P = .13; I² = 28%), and occurrence rate of nausea and vomiting (MD = 0.39; fixed 95% CI, 0.13, 1.16; P = .09; I² = 0%) between 2 types of anesthesias. However, significant differences were detected in the numerical rating scale at 24 hours (MD = −1.53; random 95% CI, −2.35, −0.71; P < .001; I² = 75%) and ORUCR (MD = 0.20; fixed 95% CI, 0.05, 0.80; P = .02; I² = 0%) between the 2 management groups. Conclusion:The results of this study demonstrated that IHR patients with RBA benefit more from post-surgery pain relief at 24h and a decrease in the ORUCR than those with CSA.Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval, IH = inguinal hernia, IHR = inguinal hernia repair, MD = mean difference, NRS at 24 hours = numerical rating scale at 24 hours, NV = occurrence rate of nausea and vomiting, ORUCR = occurrence rate of urinary retention, OT = operative time, RBA = regional block anesthesia, RCTs = randomized controlled trials, SA = spinal anesthesia, TRA = total rescue analgesics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.