Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30415150›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical anesthesia2019

Anesthetic challenges and outcomes for procedures in the intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging suite: A systematic review.

Hedwig Schroeck, Tasha L Welch, Michelle S Rovner, Heather A Johnson, Florian R Schroeck

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical anesthesia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Reshaping Anesthesia with Artificial Intelligence: From Concept to Reality.Anesthesia and critical care (Houston, Tex.) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Intraoperative MR Imaging during Glioma Resection.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2022
    Review
  5. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hedwig SchroeckGeisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, 1 Rope Ferry Road, Hanover, NH 03755, USA; Department of Anesthesiology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA. Electronic address: Hedwig.Schroeck@dartmouth.edu.
Tasha L WelchDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. Electronic address: Welch.Tasha@mayo.edu.
Michelle S RovnerDepartment of Anesthesia & Perioperative Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 165 Ashley Avenue, Suite 525CH, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: Rovner@musc.edu.
Heather A JohnsonBiomedical Libraries, Dartmouth College, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.
Florian R SchroeckGeisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, 1 Rope Ferry Road, Hanover, NH 03755, USA; White River Junction VA Medical Center, 215 N Main Street, White River Junction, VT 05009, USA; The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College, USA. Electronic address: Florian.R.Schroeck@dartmouth.edu.
Dartmouth College · USMayo Clinic · USMedical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

Intramural VA VA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveHybrid operating room suites with intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging enable image guided surgery in a fully functional operating room environment. While this environment creates challenges to anesthetic care, the effects on anesthetic adverse events and outcomes are largely unknown. This systematic scoping review aims to map the existing knowledge about anesthetic care in advanced imaging hybrid operating rooms.

methodsA broad-based literature search was performed using the PubMed (Medline), Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. References published in English between January 1994 and August 2017 were included. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE guidelines.

resultsForty-seven manuscripts were eligible for data collection. Adverse events were heterogeneously defined across 17 manuscripts and occurred in 0 to 100% (quality of evidence mostly very low). Monitoring difficulty was reported in 4 manuscripts of very low data quality. Interference between the magnet and the electrocardiogram was investigated in 2 manuscripts (quality of evidence low and very low, respectively). None of the reported events appeared to result in long-term patient harm. Author recommendations or a narrative review of the literature were provided in 40 manuscripts. Common safety concerns included lower equipment reliability, inaccessibility of the patient and airway, and the relative isolation of the suite (in relationship to other anesthesia care areas). Most authors also emphasized the importance of safety checklists, protocols, and provider training. DISCUSSION: While intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging hybrid operating rooms are increasingly utilized, the existing literature does not allow estimating adverse event rates in this location. Prospective studies quantifying the effect of the environment on anesthesia outcomes are lacking. Despite this, there is a broad consensus regarding the anesthetic and safety concerns. More research is needed to inform practice standards and training requirements for this challenging environment.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaHumansIntraoperative CareIntraoperative ComplicationsMagnetic Resonance ImagingOperating RoomsSurgery, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID30415150
PMCPMC7038577
OpenAlexW2899921810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.