Safety of prone emergence from general endotracheal anesthesia in patients undergoing ERCP: a randomized controlled trial.
ERCP
Extubation-related adverse events
Prone position
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2023
10 2023
Historique:
received:
10
11
2022
accepted:
30
05
2023
medline:
27
9
2023
pubmed:
7
7
2023
entrez:
6
7
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Conventional supine emergence and prone extubation from general endotracheal anesthesia (GEA) are associated with extubation-related adverse events (ERAEs). Given the minimally invasive nature of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as well as the improved ventilation/perfusion matching and easier airway opening in the prone position, we aimed to assess the safety of prone emergence and extubation in patients undergoing ERCP under GEA. Totally, 242 eligible patients were recruited and randomized into the supine extubation group (n = 121; supine group) and the prone extubation group (n = 121; prone group). The primary endpoint was the incidence of ERAEs during emergence, including hemodynamic fluctuations, coughing, stridor, and hypoxemia requiring airway maneuvers. The secondary endpoints included the incidence of monitoring disconnections, extubation time, recovery time, room exit time, and post-procedure sore throat. The incidence of ERAEs was significantly lower in the prone group compared with the supine group (8.3% vs 34.7%, OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.18-0.56; P < 0.001). Moreover, the prone group demonstrated no monitoring disconnections, shorter extubation time and room exit time, faster recovery, and, lower frequency and milder sore throat after the procedure. For patients undergoing ERCP under GEA, compared with supine, prone emergence, and extubation had remarkably lower rates of EAREs and better recovery, and can maintain continuous monitoring and improve efficiency.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Conventional supine emergence and prone extubation from general endotracheal anesthesia (GEA) are associated with extubation-related adverse events (ERAEs). Given the minimally invasive nature of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as well as the improved ventilation/perfusion matching and easier airway opening in the prone position, we aimed to assess the safety of prone emergence and extubation in patients undergoing ERCP under GEA.
METHODS
Totally, 242 eligible patients were recruited and randomized into the supine extubation group (n = 121; supine group) and the prone extubation group (n = 121; prone group). The primary endpoint was the incidence of ERAEs during emergence, including hemodynamic fluctuations, coughing, stridor, and hypoxemia requiring airway maneuvers. The secondary endpoints included the incidence of monitoring disconnections, extubation time, recovery time, room exit time, and post-procedure sore throat.
RESULTS
The incidence of ERAEs was significantly lower in the prone group compared with the supine group (8.3% vs 34.7%, OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.18-0.56; P < 0.001). Moreover, the prone group demonstrated no monitoring disconnections, shorter extubation time and room exit time, faster recovery, and, lower frequency and milder sore throat after the procedure.
CONCLUSIONS
For patients undergoing ERCP under GEA, compared with supine, prone emergence, and extubation had remarkably lower rates of EAREs and better recovery, and can maintain continuous monitoring and improve efficiency.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37415015
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10187-7
pii: 10.1007/s00464-023-10187-7
doi:
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7493-7501Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Smith ZL, Das KK, Kushnir VM (2019) Anesthesia-administered sedation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: monitored anesthesia care or general endotracheal anesthesia? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 32:531–537
doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000741
pubmed: 30994476
Ferreira LE, Baron TH (2008) Comparison of safety and efficacy of ERCP performed with the patient in supine and prone positions. Gastrointest Endosc 67:1037–1043
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.10.029
pubmed: 18206877
Cavallone LF, Vannucci A (2013) Review article: extubation of the difficult airway and extubation failure. Anesth Analg 116:368–383
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31827ab572
pubmed: 23302983
Kumar S, Sahni N, Bhagat H, Jain A, Wig J, Gandhi K, Chhabra R (2016) A randomized clinical trial of prone position extubation to reduce the severity of coughing in patients undergoing dorsolumbar spine surgery. Can J Anaesth 63:774–775
doi: 10.1007/s12630-016-0588-z
pubmed: 27038289
Olympio MA, Youngblood BL, James RL (2000) Emergence from anesthesia in the prone versus supine position in patients undergoing lumbar surgery. Anesthesiology 93:959–963
doi: 10.1097/00000542-200010000-00014
pubmed: 11020746
Yorukoglu D, Alanoglu Z, Dilek UB, Can OS, Kecik Y (2006) Comparison of different extubation techniques in lumbar surgery: prone extubation versus supine extubation with or without prior injection of intravenous lidocaine. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 18:165–169
doi: 10.1097/01.ana.0000204535.25501.c5
pubmed: 16799342
Ozden MG, Bakan N, Kocoglu H (2020) The effect of extubation in prone position on emergence and recovery in lumbar spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Sci 67(2):185–190
pubmed: 32536118
Goudra B, Singh PM (2014) ERCP: the unresolved question of endotracheal intubation. Dig Dis Sci 59:513–519
doi: 10.1007/s10620-013-2931-3
pubmed: 24221339
Edgcombe H, Carter K, Yarrow S (2008) Anaesthesia in the prone position. Br J Anaesth 100:165–183
doi: 10.1093/bja/aem380
pubmed: 18211991
Malafa MM, Coleman JE, Bowman RW, Rohrich RJ (2016) Perioperative corneal abrasion: updated guidelines for prevention and management. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:790e–798e
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002108
pubmed: 27119941
Aldrete JA, Kroulik D (1970) A postanesthetic recovery score. Anesth Analg 49:924–934
doi: 10.1213/00000539-197011000-00020
pubmed: 5534693
Aldrete JA (2007) Post-anesthetic recovery score. J Am Coll Surg 205:e3–e4 (author reply e4-5)
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.07.034
pubmed: 17964430
Tung A, Fergusson NA, Ng N, Hu V, Dormuth C, Griesdale DEG (2020) Medications to reduce emergence coughing after general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 124:480–495
doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.12.041
Veder LL, Joosten KFM, Schlink K, Timmerman MK, Hoeve LJ, van der Schroeff MP, Pullens B (2020) Post-extubation stridor after prolonged intubation in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU): a prospective observational cohort study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 277:1725–1731
doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-05877-0
pubmed: 32130509
pmcid: 7198633
Muderris T, Tezcan G, Sancak M, Gul F, Ugur G (2019) Oral flurbiprofen spray for postoperative sore throat and hoarseness: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Minerva Anestesiol 85:21–27
doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.18.12703-9
pubmed: 29756749
Smith ZL, Mullady DK, Lang GD, Das KK, Hovis RM, Patel RS, Hollander TG, Elsner J, Ifune C, Kushnir VM (2019) A randomized controlled trial evaluating general endotracheal anesthesia versus monitored anesthesia care and the incidence of sedation-related adverse events during ERCP in high-risk patients. Gastrointest Endosc 89:855–862
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.09.001
pubmed: 30217726
Sorser SA, Fan DS, Tommolino EE, Gamara RM, Cox K, Chortkoff B, Adler DG (2014) Complications of ERCP in patients undergoing general anesthesia versus MAC. Dig Dis Sci 59:696–697
doi: 10.1007/s10620-013-2932-2
pubmed: 24202650
Chui J, Craen RA (2016) An update on the prone position: continuing professional development. Can J Anaesth 63:737–767
doi: 10.1007/s12630-016-0634-x
pubmed: 27072147
Channabasappa SM, Shankarnarayana P (2013) A comparative study of hemodynamic changes between prone and supine emergence from anesthesia in lumbar disc surgery. Anesth Essays Res 7:173–177
doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.118948
pubmed: 25885828
pmcid: 4173510
Mase K, Noguchi T, Tagami M, Imura S, Tomita K, Monma M, Nozoe M, Takashima S, Kawakatsu K (2016) Compression of the lungs by the heart in supine, side-lying, semi-prone positions. J Phys Ther Sci 28:2470–2473
doi: 10.1589/jpts.28.2470
pubmed: 27799672
pmcid: 5080154
Perbtani YB, Summerlee RJ, Yang D, An Q, Suarez A, Williamson JB, Shrode CW, Gupte AR, Chauhan SS, Draganov PV, Forsmark CE, Chang M, Wagh MS (2016) Impact of endotracheal intubation on interventional endoscopy unit efficiency metrics at a Tertiary Academic Medical Center. Am J Gastroenterol 111:800–807
doi: 10.1038/ajg.2016.97
pubmed: 27021194
Rakotondrainibe A, Randriamizao H, At R, Rcn R, Raveloson N (2017) Sore throat after extubation: perioperative risk factors in recovery room among malagasy patients. J Med Res 3:229–233
doi: 10.31254/jmr.2017.3507
Ozden MG, Bakan N, Kocoglu H (2023) The effect of extubation in prone position on emergence and recovery in lumbar spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Sci 67:185–190
doi: 10.23736/S0390-5616.20.05007-9
pubmed: 32536118
Mashiana HS, Jayaraj M, Mohan BP, Ohning G, Adler DG (2018) Comparison of outcomes for supine vs. prone position ERCP: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 6:E1296–E1301
doi: 10.1055/a-0603-3302
pubmed: 30410948
pmcid: 6221825
de Kam PJ, Nolte H, Good S, Yunan M, Williams-Herman DE, Burggraaf J, Kluft C, Adkinson NF, Cullen C, Skov PS, Levy JH, van den Dobbelsteen DJ, van Heumen E, van Meel FCM, Glassner D, Woo T, Min KC, Peeters PAM (2018) Sugammadex hypersensitivity and underlying mechanisms: a randomised study of healthy non-anaesthetised volunteers. Br J Anaesth 121:758–767
doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.05.057
pubmed: 30236238
Herring WJ, Woo T, Assaid CA, Lupinacci RJ, Lemmens HJ, Blobner M, Khuenl-Brady KS (2017) Sugammadex efficacy for reversal of rocuronium- and vecuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade: a pooled analysis of 26 studies. J Clin Anesth 41:84–91
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.06.006
pubmed: 28802619