Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27141105›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of anaesthesia2016

Anaesthesia for non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy.

Madhusudan Upadya, P J Saneesh

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 140 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Madhusudan UpadyaDepartment of Anaesthesia, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
P J SaneeshDepartment of Anaesthesia, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman.
Manipal Academy of Higher Education · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy posts additional concerns to anaesthesiologists. The chief goals are to preserve maternal safety, maintain the pregnant state and achieve the best possible foetal outcome. The choice of anaesthetic technique and the selection of appropriate anaesthetic drugs should be guided by indication for surgery, nature, and site of the surgical procedure. Anaesthesiologist must consider the effects of the disease process itself and inhibit uterine contractions and avoid preterm labour and delivery. Foetal safety requires avoidance of potentially dangerous drugs and assurance of continuation of adequate uteroplacental perfusion. Until date, no anaesthetic drug has been shown to be clearly dangerous to the human foetus. The decision on proceeding with surgery should be made by multidisciplinary team involving anaesthesiologists, obstetricians, surgeons and perinatologists. This review describes the general anaesthetic principles, concerns regarding anaesthetic drugs and outlines some specific conditions of non-obstetric surgeries.

Indexed as

Anaesthesiafoetal developmentnon-obstetric surgerypregnancyteratogenicity

Identifiers

PMID27141105
PMCPMC4840802
OpenAlexW2325107503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.