Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31656682›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2019

The quantification and monitoring of intraoperative nociception levels in thoracic surgery: a review.

Ismael Ghanty, Stefan Schraag

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06963749 (Pain Control During Brief Intervention in Deep Sedation), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

NCT06963749 completednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Pain Control During Brief Intervention in Deep Sedation: no Pain or no Memory

TypeobservationalSponsorASL NovaraRan2024 to 2025Enrolled36ConditionsPain, Acute, Surgical Procedure, Unspecified
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Pupillometric Monitoring of Nociception in Cardiac Anesthesia.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2020
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ismael GhantyDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, UK.
Stefan SchraagDepartment of Perioperative Medicine, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, UK.
Golden Jubilee National Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nociception is the unconscious perception of a stimulus applied by trauma or surgery and expressed through a response of the autonomous nervous system. Local anaesthetics (LAs), opioids and other modulating agents such as ketamine are usually utilised to blunt nociception as a component during general anaesthesia (GA) and surgery. The effectiveness of these measures, however, are still difficult to quantify and monitoring of anti-nociception has been confined to assess variation of heart rate (HR) or blood pressure (BP). Recently, various monitoring concepts have been introduced to quantify nociception more systematically and on the other hand guide anti-nociceptive interventions more appropriately. This review describes the various technologies, their performance in clinical studies and provides a critical appraisal with particular application to thoracic anaesthesia and surgery and their relevance in the context of chronic pain after surgery.

Indexed as

monitoringnociceptionrobot-assisted thoracic surgeryThoracic anaesthesia

Identifiers

PMID31656682
PMCPMC6790460
OpenAlexW2977032331

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.