Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38811298›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of anaesthesia2024

Impact of spinal or epidural anaesthesia on perioperative outcomes in adult noncardiac surgery: a narrative review of recent evidence.

David W Hewson, Tiffany R Tedore, Jonathan G Hardman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of anaesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors.

David W HewsonDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK; Academic Unit of Injury, Recovery and Inflammation Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. Electronic address: david.hewson@nottingham.ac.uk.
Tiffany R TedoreDepartment of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Jonathan G HardmanDepartment of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK; Academic Unit of Injury, Recovery and Inflammation Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal and epidural anaesthesia and analgesia are important anaesthetic techniques, familiar to all anaesthetists and applied to patients undergoing a range of surgical procedures. Although the immediate effects of a well-conducted neuraxial technique on nociceptive and sympathetic pathways are readily observable in clinical practice, the impact of such techniques on patient-centred perioperative outcomes remains an area of uncertainty and active research. The aim of this review is to present a narrative synthesis of contemporary clinical science on this topic from the most recent 5-year period and summarise the foundational scholarship upon which this research was based. We searched electronic databases for primary research, secondary research, opinion pieces, and guidelines reporting the relationship between neuraxial procedures and standardised perioperative outcomes over the period 2018-2023. Returned citation lists were examined seeking additional studies to contextualise our narrative synthesis of results. Articles were retrieved encompassing the following outcome domains: patient comfort, renal, sepsis and infection, postoperative cancer, cardiovascular, and pulmonary and mortality outcomes. Convincing evidence of the beneficial effect of epidural analgesia on patient comfort after major open thoracoabdominal surgery outcomes was identified. Recent evidence of benefit in the prevention of pulmonary complications and mortality was identified. Despite mechanistic plausibility and supportive observational evidence, there is less certain experimental evidence to support a role for neuraxial techniques impacting on other outcome domains. Evidence of positive impact of neuraxial techniques is best established for the domains of patient comfort, pulmonary complications, and mortality, particularly in the setting of major open thoracoabdominal surgery. Recent evidence does not strongly support a significant impact of neuraxial techniques on cancer, renal, infection, or cardiovascular outcomes after noncardiac surgery in most patient groups.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, EpiduralAnesthesia, SpinalAdultHumansPerioperative CarePostoperative ComplicationsSurgical Procedures, OperativeTreatment Outcomeepidural anaesthesiageneral anaesthesiapatient-reported outcome measuresperioperative carespinal anaesthesia

Identifiers

PMID38811298
PMCPMC11282476

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.