Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 8  |  Page : 265-270

The comparison of anesthesia effect of lung surgery through video-assisted thoracic surgery: A meta-analysis


Department of Anesthesiology, Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China

Correspondence Address:
Jing-Dong Ke
Department of Anesthesiology, Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0973-1482.170534

Rights and Permissions

Objective: The epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia are the most commonly used in lung surgery through video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS). Each of these methods has their advantages and disadvantages, so the aim of this meta-analysis is to identify which anesthesia is more conducive to lung surgery under VATS and rehabilitation of patients. Materials and Methods: The Cochrane Library Database (Issue 12, 2013), PubMed (1966–2015), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (1950–2015) were searched without language restrictions. Meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.2 software (The Cochrane Collaboration, Software Update, Oxford). We calculated odds ratio (OR) and its confidence interval (95% CI) to estimate the difference between epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia through finishing of the collected data. Results: Due to our search results, 7 studies were included in our study. Studies among them show that different contents of these articles are not all the same about research direction. Our findings suggested that epidural anesthesia had more advantages than general anesthesia for operative time (mean difference = − 23.85, 95% CI: − 29.67–− 18.03, P = 0.0001). More than that, epidural anesthesia showed a good surgical outcome on postoperative hospital stay (mean difference = − 0.43, 95% CI: − 0.85–− 0.01, P = 0.04) than general anesthesia. But we found that there were no different on numbers of people with complications (OR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.23–0.89, P = 0.97) and headache occurrence (OR = 2.69, 95% CI: 0.62–11.70, P = 0.91) between epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia. Conclusion: These results indicated that epidural anesthesia can save operating time and postoperative hospital stay time. But epidural anesthesia and general anesthesia have the same effect on complications.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2175    
    Printed39    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded149    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal