ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2022
Effect of different mechanical ventilation modes on cerebral blood flow during thoracoscopic surgery in neonates: A randomised controlled trial.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of different ventilation modes on postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominal wall herniorrhaphy.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2025Article
- Unveiling tracheo-oesophageal fistula: The crucial role of imaging in the diagnosis and management.SA journal of radiology · 2025Review
- A comparison of the effects of lung protective ventilation and conventional ventilation on the occurrence of atelectasis during laparoscopic surgery in young infants: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Risk of bias in published randomised controlled trials.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Paediatric anaesthesia practice: Has it really changed over the times?Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Infants exposed to major surgery are at risk of injuries to the immature brain because of reduced arterial oxygen saturation. This study compared the effect of volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) versus pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) on cerebral oxygenation in neonates subjected to repair of tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF) under video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). Methods: This randomised controlled study included 30 full-term neonates scheduled for VATS for managing TEF under general anaesthesia. They were randomised to either VC group (n = 15), who received VCV, or PC group (n = 15), who received PCV. Cerebral oxygenation (rScO Results: rScO Conclusion: VCV is safer than PCV for cerebral oxygenation during VATS in neonates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.