Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29629201›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2018

Anesthesia and fast-track in video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS): from evidence to practice.

Marzia Umari, Stefano Falini, Matteo Segat, Michele Zuliani, Marco Crisman, Lucia Comuzzi, Francesco Pagos, Stefano Lovadina, Umberto Lucangelo

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06289790 (Analgesic Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT06289790 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Analgesic Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) Block vs Intravenous Lignocaine Infusion in Video- Assisted Thoracoscopy (VATS)

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentral Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, Warsaw, PolandRan2024 to 2025Enrolled61ConditionsThoracic Surgery, Video-AssistedArmsErector Spinae Plane (ESP) block, Lignocaine, Bupivacaine
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Fascial plane blocks for cardiothoracic surgery: a narrative review.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2024
    Review
  20. Observational
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marzia UmariDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Stefano FaliniDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Matteo SegatDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Michele ZulianiDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Marco CrismanDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Lucia ComuzziDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Francesco PagosDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Stefano LovadinaDepartment of General and Thoracic Surgery, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Umberto LucangeloDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Intensive Care, and Emergency, Cattinara University Hospital, Trieste, Italy.
Ospedale di Cattinara · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In thoracic surgery, the introduction of video-assisted thoracoscopic techniques has allowed the development of fast-track protocols, with shorter hospital lengths of stay and improved outcomes. The perioperative management needs to be optimized accordingly, with the goal of reducing postoperative complications and speeding recovery times. Premedication performed in the operative room should be wisely administered because often linked to late discharge from the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Inhalatory anesthesia, when possible, should be preferred based on protective effects on postoperative lung inflammation. Deep neuromuscular blockade should be pursued and carefully monitored, and an appropriate reversal administered before extubation. Management of one-lung ventilation (OLV) needs to be optimized to prevent not only intraoperative hypoxemia but also postoperative acute lung injury (ALI): protective ventilation strategies are therefore to be implemented. Locoregional techniques should be favored over intravenous analgesia: the thoracic epidural, the paravertebral block (PVB), the intercostal nerve block (ICNB), and the serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) are thoroughly reviewed and the most common dosages are reported. Fluid therapy needs to be administered critically, to avoid both overload and cardiovascular compromisation. All these practices are analyzed singularly with the aid of the most recent evidences aimed at the best patient care. Finally, a few notes on some of the latest trends in research are presented, such as non-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and intravenous lidocaine.

Indexed as

anesthesiaenhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)mechanical ventilationpostoperative complicationsVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)

Identifiers

PMID29629201
PMCPMC5880994
OpenAlexW2784859007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.