ReviewCureus2024
Non-operating Room Anesthesia (NORA): A Comprehensive Review of Monitored Anesthesia Care.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive value of ultrasound-measured tongue base thickness for upper airway obstruction during monitored anesthesia care: a single-center prospective observational study.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Practices, and Awareness Regarding Out-of-operating Room Sedation Among Non-anaesthesia Health Professionals: A Questionnaire Study.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2026Article
- Respiratory Depression in Non-Operating Room Anesthesia: An Overview.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Maximum oxygenation during surgical abortion with sedatives and analgesics - a simple suggestion from an anesthesiological perspective.JA clinical reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is being increasingly employed in non-operative environments, particularly in the realms of endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures. This in-depth analysis delves into the essential components of MAC within these specific contexts, with a primary focus on ensuring patient safety, evaluating efficacy, and assessing procedural outcomes. It is a common practice in endoscopic procedures to necessitate sedation for the purpose of alleviating discomfort and anxiety, ultimately ensuring patient cooperation and the successful completion of the procedure. MAC, which entails the administration of sedatives and analgesics under the close supervision of an anesthesia professional, offers a personalized approach that carefully balances the depth of sedation with maintaining optimal patient safety standards. Within the domain of MRI procedures, where challenges such as claustrophobia and motion artifacts can significantly impact the process, MAC plays a crucial role in providing a controlled setting that not only enhances image quality but also improves patient compliance throughout the procedure. The review extensively investigates the various pharmacological agents commonly utilized in these scenarios, including but not limited to midazolam and fentanyl, shedding light on their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties specific to these contexts. Furthermore, the critical role of the anesthesia provider in effectively managing potential complications, such as respiratory depression, hemodynamic instability, and allergic reactions, is thoroughly examined and discussed. The analysis extends to the implementation of MAC protocols, encompassing pre-procedural assessments, continuous intra-procedural monitoring, and comprehensive post-procedural care, all aimed at ensuring the best possible outcomes for patients. Additionally, the review delves into the economic considerations associated with MAC, taking into account its impact on procedural efficiency, healthcare costs, and patient throughput within these settings. By exploring current guidelines and recommendations established by professional societies such as the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), this review aims to provide a holistic understanding of the best practices in MAC for both endoscopy and MRI procedures. Through the synthesis of available evidence, the primary objective of this review is to contribute to informing clinical practices, enhancing patient safety measures, improving procedural success rates, and ultimately advocating for the broader adoption of monitored anesthesia care in diverse non-operative medical settings.
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.