ReviewCureus2024
Revolutionizing Cardiac Anesthesia: A Comprehensive Review of Contemporary Approaches Outside the Operating Room.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Volume Anesthesiologist and Surgeon Teams are Associated with Lower Operating Room Charges for Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Embracing the 'NORCA' Revolution: From Operating Room 'Marathon' to Cathlab 'Sprints'.Annals of cardiac anaesthesia · 2025Article
- What is new in cardiac anesthesia in 2024?Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2025Review
- Effects of Midazolam and Dexmedetomidine on Cognitive Dysfunction Following Open-Heart Surgery: A Comprehensive Review.Brain and behavior · 2025Review
- A review of recent advances in anesthetic drugs for patients undergoing cardiac surgery.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Application of Echocardiography in Anaesthesia: From Preoperative Risk Assessment to Postoperative Care.Cureus · 2024Review
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review article provides a comprehensive examination of the evolution of cardiac anesthesia, emphasizing contemporary approaches beyond the traditional operating room (OR) setting. Tracing the historical roots of cardiac anesthesia from its inception in the mid-20th century, the narrative explores the significant paradigm shift driven by technological advancements and changing procedural approaches. The review highlights the emergence of non-OR environments, such as hybrid operating rooms, catheterization laboratories, and electrophysiology labs, as integral spaces for cardiac interventions. Key findings underscore the importance of patient selection, preoperative assessment, and specialized anesthetic management in optimizing outcomes. Implications for the future of cardiac anesthesia include the potential for enhanced patient-centered care, reduced complications, and improved resource utilization through the integration of advanced technologies. The call to action involves encouraging ongoing research and fostering collaboration among healthcare professionals to refine protocols further, address challenges, and propel the field toward continued innovation in contemporary cardiac interventions.
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.