Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31660064›Full record

ReviewPatient safety in surgery2019

Current concepts of perioperative monitoring in high-risk surgical patients: a review.

Paolo Aseni, Stefano Orsenigo, Enrico Storti, Marco Pulici, Sergio Arlati

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Patient safety in surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Impact of diabetic kidney disease on perioperative outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion: a propensity score analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Versatility of ImpellaThe Journal of innovations in cardiac rhythm management · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paolo AseniDepartment of Emergency Medicine, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore 3, 20162 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6811-9305
Stefano OrsenigoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Enrico StortiDipartimento Emergenza Urgenza, UOC Anestesia e Rianimazione, ASST, Lodi, Italy.
Marco PuliciDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Sergio ArlatiDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.
Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda · ITOspedale Maggiore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A substantial number of patients are at high-risk of intra- or post-operative complications or both. Most perioperative deaths are represented by patients who present insufficient physiological reserve to meet the demands of major surgery. Recognition and management of critical high-risk surgical patients require dedicated and effective teams, capable of preventing, recognize, start treatment with adequate support in time to refer patients to the satisfactory ICU level provision. The main task for health-care planners and managers is to identify and reduce this severe risk and to encourage patient's safety practices. Inadequate tissue perfusion and decreased cellular oxygenation due to hypovolemia, heart dysfunction, reduced cardiovascular reserve, and concomitant diseases are the most common causes of perioperative complications. Hemodynamic, respiratory and careful sequential monitoring have become essential aspects of the clinical practice both for surgeons and intensivists. New monitoring techniques have changed significantly over the past few years and are now able to rapidly identify shock states earlier, define the etiology, and monitor the response to different therapies. Many of these techniques are now minimally invasive or non-invasive. Advanced hemodynamic and respiratory monitoring combines invasive, non-invasive monitoring skills. Non-invasive ultrasound has emerged during the last years as an essential operative and perioperative evaluation tool, and its use is now rapidly growing. Perioperative management guided by appropriate sequential clinical evaluation combined with respiratory and hemodynamic monitoring is an established tool to help clinicians to identify those patients at higher risk in the attempt to reduce the complications rate and potentially improve patient outcomes. This review aims to provide an update of currently available standard concepts and evolving technologies of the various respiratory and hemodynamic monitoring systems for the high-risk surgical patients, highlighting their potential usefulness when integrated with careful clinical evaluation.

Indexed as

CapnographyGoal-directed therapyHemodynamic monitoringHigh-risk surgeryOxygen deliveryPatient safetyUltrasound monitoring

Identifiers

PMID31660064
PMCPMC6806509
OpenAlexW2981368361

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.