Resúmenes Epistemonikos

Effects of hypotensive anesthesia compared to normotensive anesthesia in orthognathic surgery

Back to article
About the body of evidence for this question
What is the evidenceSee evidence matrix in Epistemonikos laterWe found three systematic reviews [2], [4], [5], incl-uding eleven randomized controlled trials reported in 11 references [3], [7], [8][8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]. This table and the summary in general are based on the randomized controlled trials, since the observational studies did not increase the certainty of the existing evidence, nor did they provide additional relevant information.
What types of patients were included*All studies included patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, within a range of mean age of 14.6 to 42.7 years. One study included only patients classified as ASA I [11].The types of osteotomies included: anterior maxillary osteotomy, Le Fort I, bilateral sagittal split osteotomy, double jaw, and combined maxillary and mandibular osteotomy
What types of interventions were included*All the studies evaluated the use of hypotensive agents compared with no use of hypotensive agents, three studies used only sodium nitroprusside [8,15,17], one study used nitroglycerin and halothane [3], one study used sodium nitroprusside and enflurane [11], two studies used only isoflurane [10,12], one study used isoflurane and labetalol [9], one study used propranolol [14], one study used nitroglycerin and remifentanil [7], and one study used nitroglycerin and esmolol [13].In three studies the mean arterial blood pressure was 55-65 mm Hg [7],[11],[12], one study with a MAP 50-55 mm Hg, [15], one study with a MAP 50-60 mm Hg [9], one study with a MAP 50-64 mm Hg [10], one study with a MAP 60-70 mm Hg [17], one study with a MAP 70 mm Hg [8], one study with a MAP 72 mm Hg [13], and one study with a MAP of systolic blood pressure ≤ 75% baseline [14].
What types of outcomes were measuredAll the studies reported multiple outcomes, which were grouped by systematic reviews as follows [2], [4], [5]:

Intraoperative blood loss.

Surgical time.

Quality of the surgical field.