4.4 Review

Effect of perioperative dexamethasone on subjective voice quality after thyroidectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Journal

LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY
Volume 400, Issue 8, Pages 929-936

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-015-1354-3

Keywords

Dexamethasone; Voice; Thyroidectomy; Meta-analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Prophylactic dexamethasone has been shown to reduce postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. However, its effects on postoperative voice outcomes remain uncertain. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was conducted. Cochrane database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were thoroughly searched. Studies that compared intravenous dexamethasone administration with no dexamethasone in patients undergoing thyroidectomy were included. Main outcome measure was the difference in postoperative voice assessment between groups. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed and random effects models. Results Four studies with a total of 313 patients met inclusion criteria. Significant heterogeneity of study results was noted. Using random effects models, pooled data showed no difference in subjective voice quality between groups preoperatively (SMD, 0.29; 95 % CI -0.37 to 0.96; P=0.39), 24 h after thyroidectomy (SMD, -1.02; 95 % CI -2.36 to 0.31; P=0.13), or at 48 h (SMD, -0.05; 95 % CI -0.30 to 0.21; P=0.72). A sensitivity analysis excluding one observational study yielded similar results. Conclusion There are insufficient data for definite conclusions to be drawn regarding the effectiveness of a single perioperative administration of dexamethasone to reduce short-term voice disturbances after thyroidectomy. Further prospective trials using objective voice analysis are warranted to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available