Geng 2017.
Methods | RCT, parallel design, single‐centre | |
Participants |
Total number of randomized participants: 150 Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Type of surgery: laparoscopic cholecystectomy Baseline characteristics TIVA group
Inhalational maintenance group (isoflurane)
Inhalational maintenance group (sevoflurane)
Country: China Setting: hospital |
|
Interventions |
TIVA group Participants: n = 50; 0 losses Induction details: 5 minutes of pre‐oxygenation, then midazolam 0.05 mg/kg, fentanyl 4 µg/kg, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. TCI 3.0 µg/kg propofol Maintenance details: propofol with target concentration 2.5 µg/mL to 3.0 µg/mL. Remifentanil 0.2 µg/kg/min to 0.3 µg/kg/min. To maintain BIS 40 to 50 Other information: all patients given crystalloids as required. All patients were given flurbiprofen 100 mg and granisetron 3 mg at beginning of operation, and 0.25% ropivacaine via local infiltration for postoperative analgesia Inhalational maintenance groups Participants: n = 50; 0 losses Induction details: 5 minutes of pre‐oxygenation, then midazolam 0.05 mg/kg, fentanyl 4 µg/kg, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. TCI 3.0 µg/kg propofol Maintenance details: isoflurane 1.0 MAC to 1.5 MAC. Remifentanil 0.2 µg/kg/min to 0.3 µg/kg/min. To maintain BIS 40 to 50 Other information: fluids and analgesics same as TIVA group Inhalational maintenance groups Participants: n = 50; 0 losses Induction details: 5 minutes of pre‐oxygenation, then midazolam 0.05 mg/kg, fentanyl 4 µg/kg, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. TCI 3.0 µg/kg propofol Maintenance details: sevoflurane 1.0 MAC to 1.5 MAC. Remifentanil 0.2 µg/kg/min to 0.3 µg/kg/min. To maintain BIS 40 to 50 Other information: fluids and analgesics same as TIVA group |
|
Outcomes |
|
|
Notes |
Funding/declarations of interest: no funding and authors declare no conflicts of interest Study dates: December 2010 to June 2011 |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Use of a computer‐generated random number table |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No details |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not feasible to blind anaesthetists to intervention groups |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | A blinded anaesthetist evaluated cognitive scores |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No losses |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Retrospective clinical trials registration (ChiCTR‐OCC‐11001411). Not feasible to assess risk of selective reporting bias |
Other bias | Unclear risk | Some differences in duration of anaesthesia, surgery times, and time to emergence from anaesthesia. We were not certain whether these differences were clinically significant. Also note that no ages were reported in baseline characteristics |