Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35966792›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022

Mitigation of perioperative neurocognitive disorders: A holistic approach.

Seyed A Safavynia, Peter A Goldstein, Lisbeth A Evered

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Seyed A SafavyniaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States.
Peter A GoldsteinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States.
Lisbeth A EveredDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, United States.
Cornell University · USMIND Research Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

William Morton introduced the world to ether anesthesia for use during surgery in the Bullfinch Building of the Massachusetts General Hospital on October 16, 1846. For nearly two centuries, the prevailing wisdom had been that the effects of general anesthetics were rapidly and fully reversible, with no apparent long-term adverse sequelae. Despite occasional concerns of a possible association between surgery and anesthesia with dementia since 1887 (Savage, 1887), our initial belief was robustly punctured following the publication in 1998 of the International Study of Post-Operative Cognitive Dysfunction [ISPOCD 1] study by Moller et al. (1998) in The Lancet, in which they demonstrated in a prospective fashion that there were in fact persistent adverse effects on neurocognitive function up to 3 months following surgery and that these effects were common. Since the publication of that landmark study, significant strides have been made in redefining the terminology describing cognitive dysfunction, identifying those patients most at risk, and establishing the underlying etiology of the condition, particularly with respect to the relative contributions of anesthesia and surgery. In 2018, the International Nomenclature Consensus Working Group proposed new nomenclature to standardize identification of and classify perioperative cognitive changes under the umbrella of perioperative neurocognitive disorders (PND) (Evered et al., 2018a). Since then, the new nomenclature has tried to describe post-surgical cognitive derangements within a unifying framework and has brought to light the need to standardize methodology in clinical studies and motivate such studies with hypotheses of PND pathogenesis. In this narrative review, we highlight the relevant literature regarding recent key developments in PND identification and management throughout the perioperative period. We provide an overview of the new nomenclature and its implications for interpreting risk factors identified by clinical association studies. We then describe current hypotheses for PND development, using data from clinical association studies and neurophysiologic data where appropriate. Finally, we offer broad clinical guidelines for mitigating PND in the perioperative period, highlighting the role of Brain Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (Brain-ERAS) protocols.

Indexed as

anesthesiacognitiondeliriumperioperative neurocognitive disorders (PND)reviewsurgery

Identifiers

PMID35966792
PMCPMC9363758
OpenAlexW4288033619

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.