| Title |
Epinephrine in irrigation fluid for visual clarity in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Orthopaedics, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00264-018-4021-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liang-Tseng Kuo, Chi-Lung Chen, Pei-An Yu, Wei-Hsiu Hsu, Ching-Chi Chi, Jae-Chul Yoo |
| Abstract |
To investigate whether epinephrine in irrigation fluid improves visual clarity in arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the surgical outcomes of patients who did and did not receive epinephrine during arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for relevant RCTs. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool to assess the risk of bias and adopted random-effects model meta-analysis to combine data. We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to evaluate the overall quality of the body of the retrieved evidence. The primary outcome was visual clarity. The secondary outcomes were operative time, amount of irrigation fluid, the need for increased pump pressure, and adverse cardiovascular events. This study included three RCTs with a total of 238 participants (124 in the epinephrine group and 114 in the non-epinephrine group). The use of epinephrine in irrigation fluid for shoulder arthroscopy achieved better visual clarity (standardized mean difference, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 1.39; p < 0.0001) and less need for increased pump pressure (risk ratio, 0.40; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.64; p = 0.0001) compared to the non-epinephrine group. No significant differences were noted in operative time (mean difference - 5.08; 95% CI - 14.46 to 4.31; p = 0.29) and amount of irrigation fluid (mean difference - 1.04; 95% CI - 2.38 to 0.39; p = 0.12) between the two groups. No adverse events were recorded in any of the included trials. The current evidence shows that the use of epinephrine in arthroscopic shoulder surgery may improve visualization and does not appear to have any major disadvantages. Level I. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Researcher | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 17 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 18 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,011,732
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from International Orthopaedics
#892
of 1,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,901
of 328,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Orthopaedics
#17
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,458 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,678 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.