Kuo-Chuan Hung , Li-Chen Chang , Chun-Ning Ho , Jheng-Yan Wu , Chih-Wei Hsu , Chien-Ming Lin , I-Wen Chen
{"title":"Impact of intravenous steroids on subjective recovery quality after surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials","authors":"Kuo-Chuan Hung , Li-Chen Chang , Chun-Ning Ho , Jheng-Yan Wu , Chih-Wei Hsu , Chien-Ming Lin , I-Wen Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study objective</h3><p>Quality of postoperative recovery is a crucial aspect of perioperative care. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous steroids in improving the quality of recovery (QoR) after surgery, as measured by validated QoR scales.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Operating room.</p></div><div><h3>Intervention</h3><p>The use of a single dose of intravenous steroids as a supplement to general anesthesia.</p></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><p>Adult patients undergoing surgery.</p></div><div><h3>Measurements</h3><p>A literature search was conducted using electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE and Embase) from their inception to June 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intravenous steroids with placebo or no treatment in adult patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were included. The primary outcome was the QoR scores on postoperative days (POD) 1 and 2–3, as assessed by validated QoR scales (QoR-15 and QoR-40). Secondary outcomes included QoR dimensions, analgesic rescue, pain scores, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).</p></div><div><h3>Main results</h3><p>Eleven RCTs involving 951 patients were included in this study. The steroid group showed significant improvements in global QoR scores on POD 1 (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.52; 95 % confidence interval[CI]: 0.22 to 0.82; <em>P</em> = 0.0007) and POD 2–3 (SMD: 0.50; 95 % CI: 0.19 to 0.81; <em>P</em> = 0.001) compared to the control group. Significant improvements were also observed in all QoR dimensions on POD 1, with the effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. Intravenous steroids also significantly reduced the analgesic rescue requirements (RR: 0.77; 95 % CI: 0.67 to 0.88; <em>P</em> = 0.0003), postoperative pain scores (SMD: -0.41; 95 % CI: −0.68 to −0.14; <em>P</em> = 0.003), and PONV incidence (RR: 0.73; 95 % CI: 0.56 to 0.95; <em>P</em> = 0.02).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Intravenous administration of steroids significantly improved QoR after surgery. The benefits of steroids extend to all dimensions of QoR and important clinical outcomes such as analgesic requirements, pain scores, and PONV. These findings support the use of steroids as an effective strategy to enhance the postoperative recovery quality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15506,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 111625"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095281802400254X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study objective
Quality of postoperative recovery is a crucial aspect of perioperative care. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of intravenous steroids in improving the quality of recovery (QoR) after surgery, as measured by validated QoR scales.
Design
Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Setting
Operating room.
Intervention
The use of a single dose of intravenous steroids as a supplement to general anesthesia.
Patients
Adult patients undergoing surgery.
Measurements
A literature search was conducted using electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE and Embase) from their inception to June 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intravenous steroids with placebo or no treatment in adult patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were included. The primary outcome was the QoR scores on postoperative days (POD) 1 and 2–3, as assessed by validated QoR scales (QoR-15 and QoR-40). Secondary outcomes included QoR dimensions, analgesic rescue, pain scores, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).
Main results
Eleven RCTs involving 951 patients were included in this study. The steroid group showed significant improvements in global QoR scores on POD 1 (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.52; 95 % confidence interval[CI]: 0.22 to 0.82; P = 0.0007) and POD 2–3 (SMD: 0.50; 95 % CI: 0.19 to 0.81; P = 0.001) compared to the control group. Significant improvements were also observed in all QoR dimensions on POD 1, with the effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. Intravenous steroids also significantly reduced the analgesic rescue requirements (RR: 0.77; 95 % CI: 0.67 to 0.88; P = 0.0003), postoperative pain scores (SMD: -0.41; 95 % CI: −0.68 to −0.14; P = 0.003), and PONV incidence (RR: 0.73; 95 % CI: 0.56 to 0.95; P = 0.02).
Conclusions
Intravenous administration of steroids significantly improved QoR after surgery. The benefits of steroids extend to all dimensions of QoR and important clinical outcomes such as analgesic requirements, pain scores, and PONV. These findings support the use of steroids as an effective strategy to enhance the postoperative recovery quality.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Anesthesia (JCA) addresses all aspects of anesthesia practice, including anesthetic administration, pharmacokinetics, preoperative and postoperative considerations, coexisting disease and other complicating factors, cost issues, and similar concerns anesthesiologists contend with daily. Exceptionally high standards of presentation and accuracy are maintained.
The core of the journal is original contributions on subjects relevant to clinical practice, and rigorously peer-reviewed. Highly respected international experts have joined together to form the Editorial Board, sharing their years of experience and clinical expertise. Specialized section editors cover the various subspecialties within the field. To keep your practical clinical skills current, the journal bridges the gap between the laboratory and the clinical practice of anesthesiology and critical care to clarify how new insights can improve daily practice.