Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27245925›Full record

ArticleDer Anaesthesist2016

[A Germany-wide survey on anaesthesia in thoracic surgery].

J Defosse, M Schieren, A Böhmer, V von Dossow, T Loop, F Wappler, M U Gerbershagen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Anaesthesist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Thoracic Anaesthesia Practices in Turkey: A Survey Study.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

J DefosseKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum der Universität Witten/Herdecke, Kliniken Köln, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Köln, Deutschland. defossej@kliniken-koeln.de.
M SchierenKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum der Universität Witten/Herdecke, Kliniken Köln, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Köln, Deutschland.
A BöhmerKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum der Universität Witten/Herdecke, Kliniken Köln, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Köln, Deutschland.
V von DossowKlinik für Anaesthesiologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland.
T LoopKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Deutschland.
F WapplerKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum der Universität Witten/Herdecke, Kliniken Köln, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Köln, Deutschland.
M U GerbershagenKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Klinikum der Universität Witten/Herdecke, Kliniken Köln, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Köln, Deutschland.
Witten/Herdecke University · DEKliniken der Stadt Köln · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity Medical Center Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectiveThis study's objective was to evaluate current thoracic anaesthesia practice in Germany and to quantify potential differences depending on the hospital's level of care. MATERIALS AND

methodsA four-part online survey containing 28 questions was mailed to all anaesthesiology department chairs (n = 777) registered with the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine.

resultsThe general response rate was 31.5 % (n = 245). High monthly volumes (>50 operations/month) of intrathoracic procedures, performed by specialized thoracic surgeons are mostly limited to hospitals of maximum care, university hospitals, and specialized thoracic clinics. In hospitals with a lower level of care, intrathoracic operations occur less frequently (1-5/month) and are commonly performed by general (69.3 %) rather than thoracic surgeons (15.4 %). Video-assisted thoracic surgeries are the most invasive intrathoracic procedures for most hospitals with a low level of care (61.5 %). Extended resections and pneumonectomies occur mainly in hospitals of maximum care and university hospitals. Thoracic anaesthesia is primarily performed by consultants or senior physicians (59.9 %). The double lumen tube (91.4 %) is the preferred method to enable one-lung ventilation (bronchial blockers: 2.7 %; missing answer: 5.9 %). A bronchoscopic confirmation of the correct placement of a double lumen tube is considered mandatory by 87.7 % of the respondents. Bronchial blockers are available in 64.7 % of all thoracic anaesthesia departments. While CPAP-valves for the deflated lung are commonly used (74.9 %), jet-ventilators are rarely accessible, especially in hospitals with a lower level of care (15.4 %). Although general algorithms for a difficult airway are widely available (87.7 %), specific recommendations for a difficult airway in thoracic anaesthesia are uncommon (4.8 %). Laryngeal mask airways (90.9 %) and videolaryngoscopy (88.8 %) are the primary adjuncts in store for a difficult airway. While hospitals with a lower level of care admitted patients routinely (92.3 %) to an intensive care unit after thoracic surgery, larger clinics used the postanaesthesia recovery room (12.5 %) and intermediate care units (14.6 %) more frequently for further surveillance. Thoracic epidural catheters (85.6 %) are predominantly chosen for peri- and postoperative analgesia, in contrast to paravertebral blockade (single shot: 8.6 %; catheter: 8.0 %) (multiple answers possible). Ultrasound is generally accessible (84.5 %) and mostly employed for the placement of central venous (81.3 %) and arterial (43.9 %) lines as well as a diagnostic tool for pulmonary pathology (62.0 %).

conclusionThe study reveals considerable differences in the anaesthetic practice in thoracic surgery. These focus mostly on the postoperative surveillance, the availability of bronchial blockers, and the use of regional anaesthetic techniques. Furthermore, it is evident that specific algorithms are needed for the difficult airway in thoracic anaesthesia. A recommendation for the high-tech work environment of thoracic anaesthesia could enhance the structural quality and optimize patient outcomes. Independent of a hospital's level of care, uniform requirements could help establish national quality standards in thoracic anaesthesia.

Indexed as

Airway ManagementAnesthesiaAnesthesiologyGermanyHealth Care SurveysHumansLaryngeal MasksOne-Lung VentilationPneumonectomyRespiration, ArtificialSurgeonsThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedThoracic Surgical ProceduresUltrasonography, InterventionalBronchial blockerDifficult airwayOne-lung ventilationRegional anaesthesiaThoracic anaesthesia

Identifiers

PMID27245925
OpenAlexW2469157156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.