Manejo da via aérea para anestesia em crianças com infecção do trato respiratório superior: revisão sistemática e meta-análise para complicações perioperatórias
Carregando...
Data
2016-02-24
Autores
Carvalho, Ana Lygia Rochitti de [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Justificativa e Objetivos: a diferença na incidência de eventos adversos perioperatórios (EAPs) entre tubo traqueal (TT), máscara laríngea (ML) e máscara facial (MF) ainda é questão controversa no tocante à anestesia em crianças com infecção de vias aéreas superiores (IVAS). O objetivo desta revisão sistemática foi comparar o risco de EAPs entre os dispositivos de via aérea após anestesia em pacientes pediátricos com IVAS. Métodos: foi conduzida revisão sistemática de acordo com as recomendações da Colaboração Cochrane e declaração PRISMA. A estratégia de busca foi realizada nas principais bases de dados eletrônicas (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Lilacs, Scielo, Scopus e Web of Science) e a última pesquisa foi realizada em 30 de junho de 2015. Não houve restrições quanto a idioma, data, revista ou publicação. Foram incluídos somente estudos avaliando EAPs em pacientes com IVAS submetidos à anestesia e cujas vias aéreas tenham sido manejadas com MF, ML ou TT. Dados de cada ensaio clínico randomizado (ECR) foram combinados utilizando o modelo de efeito randômico para cálculo do risco relativo (RR). Resultados: dos 680 estudos identificados, 5 eram ECRs e foram incluídos na análise final. Não houve diferença estatisticamente significante entre os diferentes dispositivos estudados com relação a broncoespasmo (RR 0,47, IC 95% 0,04-6,25, p=0,57), laringoespasmo (RR 0,84, IC 95% 0,56-1,27, p=0,41), dessaturação arterial de oxigênio (RR 0,66, IC 95% 0,38-1,16, p=0,15), apneia (RR 0,91, IC 95% 0,49-1,67, p=0,75), dor de garganta (RR 0,87, IC 95% 0,39-1,96, p=0,74) e taxa de readmissão hospitalar (RR 0,76, IC 95% 0,17-3,33, p=0,71). O uso de ML resultou em significante redução da incidência de tosse (RR 0,63, IC 95% 0,45-0,89, p=0,009) comparado aos outros dispositivos de via aérea. Notou-se, também, tendência à redução da incidência de vômito com o uso da ML quando comparado ao TT e MF, embora sem significância estatística (RR 0,57, IC 95% 0,33-1,00, p=0,05). Conclusões: o manejo ideal das vias aéreas em crianças com IVAS permanece incerto. Esta revisão sistemática demonstra que o uso da ML durante anestesia em crianças com IVAS não resultou na diminuição dos mais temidos EAPs. Entretanto, o uso da ML foi mais eficaz em reduzir a incidência de tosse comparado aos outros dispositivos de via aérea. Além disso, houve tendência da ML em reduzir a incidência de vômito.
Background: rate of perioperative adverse events (PAEs) among tracheal tube (TT), laryngeal mask airway (LMA), and facemask (FM) remains a controversial issue during anesthesia in children with an upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). The aim of the present study was to compare the risk of PAEs among the different airway devices after anesthesia in pediatric patients with an URTI. Methods: a systematic review according to the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidelines was conducted. The search was performed in the main electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Lilacs, Scielo, Scopus and Web of Science) and the last one was carried out in June 30, 2015. There were no language, year of publication, or publication status restriction. Only randomized clinical trial evaluating anesthesia in children with URTI and who were submitted to either of the airway devices were included. Data from each trial was combined using the random effects models to calculate the pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals. Results: from 680 studies identified, 5 randomized clinical trials were included in the final analysis. There were no statistical difference with regard to bronchospasm (RR 0.47, CI 95% 0.04-6.25, p=0.57), laryngospasm (RR 0.84, CI 95% 0.56-1.27, p=0.41), arterial oxygen desaturation (RR 0.66, CI 95% 0.38-1.16, p=0.15), apnea or breath holding (RR 0.91, CI 95% 0.49-1.67, p=0.75), sore throat (RR 0.87, CI 95% 0.39-1.96, p=0.74), and hospital readmission (RR 0.76, CI 95% 0.17-3.33, p=0.71). The use of LMA produced a significant reduction of cough (RR 0.63, CI 95% 0.45- 0.89, p=0.009) compared with other airway devices. Also, LMA tended toward a reduction of vomiting compared with other forms of airway management but did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.57, CI 95% 0.33-1.00, p=0.05). Conclusions: the ideal airway management in children with URTI remains obscure. This systematic review demonstrates that the use of LMA during anesthesia for surgery in children with URTI did not result in decrease of the most feared PAEs. However, the use of LMA was better than other airway devices in reducing cough and tended toward a protective effect against vomiting.
Background: rate of perioperative adverse events (PAEs) among tracheal tube (TT), laryngeal mask airway (LMA), and facemask (FM) remains a controversial issue during anesthesia in children with an upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). The aim of the present study was to compare the risk of PAEs among the different airway devices after anesthesia in pediatric patients with an URTI. Methods: a systematic review according to the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidelines was conducted. The search was performed in the main electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Lilacs, Scielo, Scopus and Web of Science) and the last one was carried out in June 30, 2015. There were no language, year of publication, or publication status restriction. Only randomized clinical trial evaluating anesthesia in children with URTI and who were submitted to either of the airway devices were included. Data from each trial was combined using the random effects models to calculate the pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals. Results: from 680 studies identified, 5 randomized clinical trials were included in the final analysis. There were no statistical difference with regard to bronchospasm (RR 0.47, CI 95% 0.04-6.25, p=0.57), laryngospasm (RR 0.84, CI 95% 0.56-1.27, p=0.41), arterial oxygen desaturation (RR 0.66, CI 95% 0.38-1.16, p=0.15), apnea or breath holding (RR 0.91, CI 95% 0.49-1.67, p=0.75), sore throat (RR 0.87, CI 95% 0.39-1.96, p=0.74), and hospital readmission (RR 0.76, CI 95% 0.17-3.33, p=0.71). The use of LMA produced a significant reduction of cough (RR 0.63, CI 95% 0.45- 0.89, p=0.009) compared with other airway devices. Also, LMA tended toward a reduction of vomiting compared with other forms of airway management but did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.57, CI 95% 0.33-1.00, p=0.05). Conclusions: the ideal airway management in children with URTI remains obscure. This systematic review demonstrates that the use of LMA during anesthesia for surgery in children with URTI did not result in decrease of the most feared PAEs. However, the use of LMA was better than other airway devices in reducing cough and tended toward a protective effect against vomiting.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
IVAS, Criança, Máscara laríngea, Dispositivos de via aérea, Complicações perioperatórias, Intubação traqueal, URTI, Children, Laryngeal mask airway, Airway devices, Perioperative complications, Tracheal intubation