Tang 2014.
Methods | RCT, parallel design, single‐centre | |
Participants |
Total number of randomized participants: 220 Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Type of surgery: radical rectal resection surgery Baseline characteristics TIVA group
Inhalational maintenance group
Country: China Setting: hospital |
|
Interventions |
TIVA group Participants: n = 110; 9 losses (declined to participate in follow‐up at day 7); 101 analysed Induction details: midazolam 0.03 mg/kg to 0.04 mg/kg IV, fentanyl 0.002 mg/kg to 0.003 mg/kg IV, vecuronium 0.15 mg/kg to 0.2 mg/kg. Then propofol 1.5 mg/kg to 2 mg/kg IV Maintenance details: propofol 6 mg/kg/hour to 10 mg/kg/hour. To maintain BIS 30 to 60. Remifentanil 9 µg/kg/hour to 12 µg/kg/hour continuous IV infusion, vecuronium intermittent IV infusion Other information: all patients had PCI 150 mL saline with fentanyl 1.5 mg, tropisetron 12 mg, infusion rate 2 mL/hour, with 15‐minute lockout Inhalational maintenance group Participants: n = 110; 11 losses (declined to participate in follow‐up at day 7); 99 analysed Induction details: midazolam 0.03 mg/kg to 0.04 mg/kg IV, fentanyl 0.002 mg/kg to 0.003 mg/kg IV, vecuronium 0.15 mg/kg to 0.2 mg/kg. Then 8% sevoflurane (fresh gas flow 6 L/min, decreased to 3% to 4% after loss of consciousness with fresh gas flow 1 L/min to 2 L/min) Maintenance details: sevoflurane 2% to 3%. To maintain BIS 30 to 60. Remifentanil 9 µg/kg/hour to 12 µg/kg/hour continuous IV infusion, vecuronium intermittent IV infusion Other information: analgesics same as TIVA group |
|
Outcomes |
|
|
Notes |
Funding/declarations of interest: study authors report that authors received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not‐for‐profit sectors Study dates: January 2010 to November 2013 |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Use of computer‐generated, blocked random‐allocation sequence |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No details |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not feasible to blind anaesthetist to intervention groups |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "to ensure blinding, neuropsychological assessment work was carried out by a physician trained in psychology. Neither the physician nor the patient knew which anaesthetic had been used during surgery" |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Some loss of participant data at about 10%. It is unclear whether this loss could influence outcome data. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Study authors do not report clinical trials registration. Not feasible to judge risk of selective outcome reporting |
Other bias | Low risk | No other sources of bias identified. |