Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28757834›Full record

ReviewSaudi journal of anaesthesia

Anesthesia for minimally invasive chest wall reconstructive surgeries: Our experience and review of literature.

Shagun Bhatia Shah, Uma Hariharan, Ajay Kumar Bhargava, Laleng M Darlong

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shagun Bhatia ShahRajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Uma HariharanDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital and PGIMER, CHS, New Delhi, India.
Ajay Kumar BhargavaRajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Laleng M DarlongRajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre · INPost Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimal access procedures have revolutionized the field of surgery and opened newer challenges for the anesthesiologists. Pectus carinatum or pigeon chest is an uncommon chest wall deformity characterized by a protruding breast bone (sternum) and ribs caused by an overgrowth of the costal cartilages. It can cause a multitude of problems, including severe pain from an intercostal neuropathy, respiratory dysfunction, and psychologic issues from the cosmetic disfigurement. Pulmonary function indices, namely, forced expiratory volume over 1 s, forced vital capacity, vital capacity, and total lung capacity are markedly compromised in pectus excavatum. Earlier, open surgical correction in the form of the Ravitch procedure was followed. Currently, in the era of minimally invasive surgery, Nuss technique (pectus bar procedure) is a promising step in chest wall reconstructive surgery for pectus excavatum. Reverse Nuss is a corrective, minimally invasive surgery for pectus carinatum chest deformity. A tailor-made anesthetic technique for this new procedure has been described here based on the authors' personal experience and thorough review of literature based on Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases search.

Indexed as

Epidural anesthesiaNusspatient controlled analgesiapectus carinatumpectus excavatumtransesophageal echocardiography

Identifiers

PMID28757834
PMCPMC5516496
OpenAlexW2617965504

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.