Anders Schou Tornøe, Alison Holten Pind, Christina Cleveland Westerdahl Laursen, Cheme Andersen, Mathias Maagaard, Ole Mathiesen
{"title":"氯胺酮用于脊柱外科术后疼痛治疗:荟萃分析和试验序列分析的系统综述。","authors":"Anders Schou Tornøe, Alison Holten Pind, Christina Cleveland Westerdahl Laursen, Cheme Andersen, Mathias Maagaard, Ole Mathiesen","doi":"10.1111/aas.14307","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>We aimed to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative pain treatment with ketamine in patients undergoing spinal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception until 15 February 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing ketamine with placebo or no intervention in patients undergoing spinal surgery. The primary outcomes were cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively and serious adverse events. We adhered to recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and performed meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) to assess the risks of random errors, risk of bias assessment to evaluate the risks of systematic errors, and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included a total of 28 randomised clinical trials enrolling 2110 participants providing data for our pre-defined outcomes. Twenty-three trials enrolled adult participants and 5 trials enrolled paediatric participants. Three trials were at low risk of bias. Meta-analysis and TSA of trials including adults showed that ketamine versus placebo or no intervention seemed to reduce the cumulative 24-h opioid consumption (mean difference -17.57 mg; TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval, -24.22 to -10.92; p < .01; low certainty of evidence), and there was no evidence of a difference of ketamine versus placebo or no intervention on the risk of serious adverse events (risk ratio 2.16; 96.7% confidence interval, 0.35 to 13.17; p = .36; very low certainty of evidence).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In adults undergoing spinal surgery, ketamine may reduce cumulative 24-h opioid consumption. Ketamine may increase the occurrence of serious adverse events, but the evidence was very uncertain.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"1306-1321"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ketamine for postoperative pain treatment in spinal surgery: Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Anders Schou Tornøe, Alison Holten Pind, Christina Cleveland Westerdahl Laursen, Cheme Andersen, Mathias Maagaard, Ole Mathiesen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14307\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>We aimed to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative pain treatment with ketamine in patients undergoing spinal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception until 15 February 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing ketamine with placebo or no intervention in patients undergoing spinal surgery. The primary outcomes were cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively and serious adverse events. We adhered to recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and performed meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) to assess the risks of random errors, risk of bias assessment to evaluate the risks of systematic errors, and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included a total of 28 randomised clinical trials enrolling 2110 participants providing data for our pre-defined outcomes. Twenty-three trials enrolled adult participants and 5 trials enrolled paediatric participants. Three trials were at low risk of bias. Meta-analysis and TSA of trials including adults showed that ketamine versus placebo or no intervention seemed to reduce the cumulative 24-h opioid consumption (mean difference -17.57 mg; TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval, -24.22 to -10.92; p < .01; low certainty of evidence), and there was no evidence of a difference of ketamine versus placebo or no intervention on the risk of serious adverse events (risk ratio 2.16; 96.7% confidence interval, 0.35 to 13.17; p = .36; very low certainty of evidence).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In adults undergoing spinal surgery, ketamine may reduce cumulative 24-h opioid consumption. Ketamine may increase the occurrence of serious adverse events, but the evidence was very uncertain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1306-1321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14307\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14307","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Ketamine for postoperative pain treatment in spinal surgery: Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Aim: We aimed to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative pain treatment with ketamine in patients undergoing spinal surgery.
Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception until 15 February 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing ketamine with placebo or no intervention in patients undergoing spinal surgery. The primary outcomes were cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h postoperatively and serious adverse events. We adhered to recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and performed meta-analysis, Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) to assess the risks of random errors, risk of bias assessment to evaluate the risks of systematic errors, and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
Results: We included a total of 28 randomised clinical trials enrolling 2110 participants providing data for our pre-defined outcomes. Twenty-three trials enrolled adult participants and 5 trials enrolled paediatric participants. Three trials were at low risk of bias. Meta-analysis and TSA of trials including adults showed that ketamine versus placebo or no intervention seemed to reduce the cumulative 24-h opioid consumption (mean difference -17.57 mg; TSA-adjusted 95% confidence interval, -24.22 to -10.92; p < .01; low certainty of evidence), and there was no evidence of a difference of ketamine versus placebo or no intervention on the risk of serious adverse events (risk ratio 2.16; 96.7% confidence interval, 0.35 to 13.17; p = .36; very low certainty of evidence).
Conclusion: In adults undergoing spinal surgery, ketamine may reduce cumulative 24-h opioid consumption. Ketamine may increase the occurrence of serious adverse events, but the evidence was very uncertain.
期刊介绍:
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.