ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021
The choice of anesthesia for acute abdomen surgery patients and its influence on gastrointestinal function recovery.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo study the clinical anesthesia options for patients undergoing acute abdomen surgery and its effect on the recovery of patients' gastrointestinal function.
methods120 patients who underwent abdomen surgery in our hospital from January 2018 to January 2019 were recruited as the research cohort and placed into group A (n=40) or group B (n=80) according to different anesthesia method each underwent. Group A was administered combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, and group B was administered general anesthesia with tracheal intubation. The anesthesia-related time indicators, the postoperative analgesia, the complication rates (CR), the gastric function indicators, and the gastrointestinal function recovery times were compared between the two groups.
resultsGroup A's anesthesia-related time indicators were significantly lower than group B's (P<0.001). The visual analogue scale (VAS) postoperative pain score in group A was (2.21±0.41), which was observably lower than the corresponding score in group B (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the CR between the two groups (7.5% vs 17.5%) (P>0.05). The motilin and ghrelin levels in group A were significantly higher than they were in group B (P<0.05). The gastrointestinal function recovery time in group A was notably less than it was in group B (P<0.05).
conclusionSpinal-epidural anesthesia is a preferred technique because of its strengths in gastric function and operation success rates by taking patients' actual situations into consideration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34540087PMC8430078W3200266681What OpenQuestion holds
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.