Emergence times and airway reactions in general laryngeal mask airway anesthesia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Ana Stevanovic, Rolf Rossaint, András P Keszei, Harald Fritz, Gebhard Fröba, Friedrich Pühringer, Mark Coburn, Ana Stevanovic, Rolf Rossaint, András P Keszei, Harald Fritz, Gebhard Fröba, Friedrich Pühringer, Mark Coburn

Abstract

Background: The use of a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) in appropriate patients supports fast-track anesthesia with a lower incidence of postoperative airway-connected adverse events. Data on the most favorable anesthetic in this context, with the lowest rate of upper airway complications and fast emergence times, are controversial and limited. Desflurane seems to match these criteria best, but large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a standardized study protocol are lacking. Therefore, we aim to compare desflurane with other commonly used anesthetics, sevoflurane and propofol, in a sufficiently powered RCT. We hypothesize that desflurane is noninferior regarding the frequency of upper airway events and superior regarding the emergence times to sevoflurane and propofol.

Methods/design: A total of 351 patients undergoing surgery with an LMA will be included in this prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled, multicenter clinical trial. The patients will be randomly assigned to the three treatment arms: desflurane (n = 117), sevoflurane (n = 117), and propofol (n = 117). The emergence time (time to state the date of birth) will be the primary endpoint of this study. The secondary endpoints include further emergence times, such as time to open eyes, to remove LMA, to respond to command and to state name. Additionally, we will determine the frequency of cough and laryngospasm, measured intraoperatively and at emergence. We will assess the postoperative recovery on the first postoperative day via the Postoperative Quality Recovery Scale.

Discussion: Despite increasing importance of cost-effective and safe anesthesia application, we lack proof for the most advantageous anesthetic agent, when an LMA is used. There are only a few RCTs comparing desflurane to other commonly used anesthetics (sevoflurane, propofol and isoflurane) in patients with LMA. These RCTs were conducted with small sample sizes, huge interstudy variability, and some also showed strong biases. The present multicenter RCT will provide results from a large sample size with a standardized study protocol and minimized bias, which is feasible in the clinical routine. Furthermore, we will expand our knowledge regarding the most favorable recovery on the first postoperative day, which impacts patients' comfort after surgery.

Trial registration: EudraCT Identifier: 2014-003810-96, 5 September 2014 ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02322502, December 2014.

References

    1. Jakobsson J. Desflurane: a clinical update of a third-generation inhaled anaesthetic. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012;56:420–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02600.x.
    1. Yu SH, Beirne OR. Laryngeal mask airways have a lower risk of airway complications compared with endotracheal intubation: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68:2359–76. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.04.017.
    1. de Oliveira GS, Girao W, Fitzgerald PC, McCarthy RJ. The effect of sevoflurane versus desflurane on the incidence of upper respiratory morbidity in patients undergoing general anesthesia with a Laryngeal Mask Airway: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Anesth. 2013;25:452–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2013.03.012.
    1. Stevanovic A, Rossaint R, Fritz HG, Froeba G, Heine J, Puehringer FK, et al. Airway reactions and emergence times in general laryngeal mask airway anaesthesia A meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014;31:1–11.
    1. Afshari A, Wetterslev J. When may systematic reviews and meta-analyses be considered reliable? Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015;32:85–7. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000186.
    1. Rossaint R, Reyle-Hahn M, Schulte Am Esch J, Scholz J, Scherpereel P, Vallet B, et al. Multicenter randomized comparison of the efficacy and safety of xenon and isoflurane in patients undergoing elective surgery. Anesthesiology. 2003;98:6–13. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200301000-00005.
    1. Blackwelder WC. “Proving the null hypothesis” in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1982;3:345–53. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(82)90024-1.
    1. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2013. . Accessed Nov 2014
    1. Royse CF, Newman S, Chung F, Stygall J, McKay RE, Boldt J, et al. Development and feasibility of a scale to assess postoperative recovery: the post-operative quality recovery scale. Anesthesiology. 2010;113:892–905. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181d960a9.
    1. Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14:798–804. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01121.x.
    1. De Oliveira GS, Fitzgerald PC, Ahmad S, Marcus RJ, McCarthy RJ. Desflurane/fentanyl compared with sevoflurane/fentanyl on awakening and quality of recovery in outpatient surgery using a laryngeal mask airway: a randomized, double-blinded controlled trial. J Clin Anesth. 2013;25:651–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2013.07.006.
    1. Lema FE, Tafur LA, Giraldo C, Delgado MA. Incidence of cough after desflurane and sevoflurane administration through a laryngeal mask: a controlled clinical trial. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2010;57:141–6. doi: 10.1016/S0034-9356(10)70188-2.
    1. Gupta A, Kullander M, Ekberg K, Lennmarken C. Anaesthesia for day-care arthroscopy. A comparison between desflurane and isoflurane. Anaesthesia. 1996;51:56–62. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1996.tb07655.x.
    1. Mahmoud NA, Rose DJ, Laurence AS. Desflurane or sevoflurane for gynaecological day-case anaesthesia with spontaneous respiration? Anaesthesia. 2001;56:171–4. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2001.01528.x.
    1. White PF, Tang J, Wender RH, Yumul R, Stokes OJ, Sloninsky A, et al. Desflurane versus sevoflurane for maintenance of outpatient anesthesia: the effect on early versus late recovery and perioperative coughing. Anesth Analg. 2009;109:387–93. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181adc21a.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner