Observational studyEuropean journal of medical research2024
A prospective cohort study comparing monitored anesthesia care and intubated general anesthesia in cardiac surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass.
Observational study in European journal of medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A randomized controlled trial on the impact of anesthetic agents on renal function in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2025Trial
- Effect of dexmedetomidine on stress and inflammatory responses in patients with nasotracheal intubation after oral and maxillofacial surgery.American journal of translational research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and safety of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) versus intubated general anesthesia (IGA) for patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB).
methodsThis prospective observational study included patients scheduled for cardiac surgery involving CPB at our institution between April 2012 and February 2017. The enrolled patients were categorized into MAC and IGA groups. MAC involved local anesthesia at the sternotomy site, sedation with dexmedetomidine, analgesia with remifentanil/sufentanil, and electroacupuncture (EA). Eleven patients underwent MAC, and 13 patients received IGA. There were no instances of conversion from MAC to IGA, and both groups exhibited no major complications. The demographic characteristics, baseline parameters, and operative variables were comparable between the two groups.
resultsIntraoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the MAC group compared to the IGA group (P < 0.001). The time to oral intake of liquids was significantly shorter in the MAC group (2.14 ± 0.90 h) compared to the IGA group (22.31 ± 3.33 h) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the intensive care unit length of stay (ICU-LOS) and perioperative vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS) were significantly reduced in the MAC group compared to the IGA group (P < 0.001).
conclusionsMAC emerges as a safe and viable alternative to general anesthesia for specific patient groups undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB. Furthermore, it may enhance postoperative recovery and minimize postoperative complications compared to IGA.
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.