Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 42, Issue 12, pp 2881–2889 | Cite as

Epinephrine in irrigation fluid for visual clarity in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Liang-Tseng Kuo
  • Chi-Lung Chen
  • Pei-An Yu
  • Wei-Hsiu Hsu
  • Ching-Chi Chi
  • Jae-Chul Yoo
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate whether epinephrine in irrigation fluid improves visual clarity in arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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 of evidence

Level I

Keywords

Arthroscopy Epinephrine Shoulder Visualization Systematic review Meta-analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Ms. Yu-Shiun Tsai for her help in searching the databases and obtaining the full text of the trials.

Authors’ contributions

Author A was responsible for the study concept and design and drafting of the manuscript. Author A and Author B were responsible for the trial selection and appraisal of methodological quality. Author A and Author C participated in acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. Author E provided consultation of statistics and methodology. Author F provided consultation of clinical and reviewed the manuscript. Author D and Author E were in charge of the study concept and design, supervised the study, and critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Liang-Tseng Kuo, Chi-Lung Chen, Pei-An Yu, Wei-Hsiu Hsu, Ching-Chi Chi, and Jae-Chul Yoo declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

No ethical approval is needed for our systematic review and meta-analysis.

Informed consent

No identifying information about individual participants was shown in this systematic reivew, and thus inform consent was not needed.

Supplementary material

264_2018_4021_MOESM1_ESM.docx (16 kb)
Table S1 GRADE Recommendation of Outcomes (DOCX 16 kb)
264_2018_4021_MOESM2_ESM.docx (66 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 66 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Burkhart SS, Danaceau SM, Athanasiou KA (2001) Turbulence control as a factor in improving visualization during subacromial shoulder arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 17:209–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Morrison DS, Schaefer RK, Friedman RL (1995) The relationship between subacromial space pressure, blood pressure, and visual clarity during arthroscopic subacromial decompression. Arthroscopy 11:557–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tuijthof GJ, Dusee L, Herder JL, van Dijk CN, Pistecky PV (2005) Behavior of arthroscopic irrigation systems. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:238–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Furia JP, Zambetti GJ Jr (1992) An injection technique to create a bloodless field in arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 20:406–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kuo LT, Yu PA, Chen CL, Hsu WH, Chi CC (2017) Tourniquet use in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 18:358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Olszewski AD, Jones R, Farrell R, Kaylor K (1999) The effects of dilute epinephrine saline irrigation on the need for tourniquet use in routine arthroscopic knee surgery. Am J Sports Med 27:354–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cho SH, Yi JW, Kwack YH, Park SW, Kim MK, Rhee YG (2010) Ventricular tachycardia during arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a report of two cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130:353–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karns JL (1999) Epinephrine-induced potentially lethal arrhythmia during arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a case report. AANA J 67:419–421Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nemani VM, Frank RM, Reinhardt KR et al (2012) Popliteal venotomy during posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the setting of a popliteal artery bypass graft. Arthroscopy 28:294–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Avery DM 3rd, Gibson BW, Carolan GF (2015) Surgeon-rated visualization in shoulder arthroscopy: a randomized blinded controlled trial comparing irrigation fluid with and without epinephrine. Arthroscopy 31:12–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jensen KH, Werther K, Stryger V, Schultz K, Falkenberg B (2001) Arthroscopic shoulder surgery with epinephrine saline irrigation. Arthroscopy 17:578–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Cochrane Bias Methods Group, Cochrane Statistical Methods Group et al (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. BMJ d5928:343Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Higgins JP, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed 15 Dec 2015
  15. 15.
    DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7:177–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21:1539–1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mitchell M, Muftakhidinov B, Winchen T, et al (2017) Engauge Digitizer Software. Webpage: http://markummitchell.github.io/engauge-digitizer, Accessed 11 Dec 2017
  20. 20.
    van Montfoort DO, van Kampen PM, Huijsmans PE (2016) Epinephrine diluted saline-irrigation fluid in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a significant improvement of clarity of visual field and shortening of Total operation time. A randomized controlled trial. Arthroscopy 32:436–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Funk RH, Wagner W, Rohen JW (1992) The effect of epinephrine on ciliary process vasculature and IOP studied by intraocular microendoscopy in the albino rabbit. Curr Eye Res 11:161–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brown AR, Weiss R, Greenberg C, Flatow EL, Bigliani LU (1993) Interscalene block for shoulder arthroscopy: comparison with general anesthesia. Arthroscopy 9:295–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee JH, Min KT, Chun YM, Kim EJ, Choi SH (2011) Effects of beach-chair position and induced hypotension on cerebral oxygen saturation in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Arthroscopy 27:889–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hsiao MS, Kusnezov N, Sieg RN, Owens BD, Herzog JP (2016) Use of an irrigation pump system in arthroscopic procedures. Orthopedics 39:e474–e478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Janssen H, Stosch RV, Pöschl R et al (2014) Blood pressure response to combined general anaesthesia/interscalene brachial plexus block for outpatient shoulder arthroscopy. BMC Anesthesiol 14:50.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-14-50 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sia S, Sarro F, Lepri A, Bartoli M (2003) The effect of exogenous epinephrine on the incidence of hypotensive/bradycardic events during shoulder surgery in the sitting position during interscalene block. Anesth Analg 97:583–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yeh PC, Kharrazi FD (2012) Postarthroscopic glenohumeral chondrolysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 20:102–112Google Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryChang Gung Memorial HospitalChiayiTaiwan
  2. 2.Center for Evidence-Based MedicineChang Gung Memorial HospitalChiayiTaiwan
  3. 3.College of MedicineChang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of DermatologyChang Gung Memorial HospitalTaoyuanTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations