ArticleBMC anesthesiology2025
Inhalational versus intravenous anesthetic for cerebrovascular accident outcomes after surgical revascularization for adult moyamoya disease.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Anesthetic Management for Encephaloduroarteriosynangiosis in Moyamoya Disease: A Hemodynamic and Neuromonitoring-Integrated Framework.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Perioperative management of pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a patient with moyamoya disease: a rare case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the effects of inhalational anesthetics and intravenous anesthetics on the neurological function of patients with moyamoya disease (MMD) after vascular bypass surgery.
methodsThe clinical anesthesia data of patients were retrospectively collected. Patients who underwent bypass grafts with general anesthesia from January 1st, 2019, to December 31st, 2020, in Huashan Hospital affiliated with Fudan University, were selected. The primary endpoint was stroke incidence within seven days after anesthesia, and the secondary endpoints included transient neurological deficits (TNDs) and incidence of postoperative Epilepsy.
resultsWe compared the data of MMD patients who received inhalational anesthetics (Sevoflurane anesthetics, n = 197, group S) and intravenous anesthetics (Propofol anesthetics, n = 219, group P). The stroke incidence in the two groups (group S vs. group P) was 6.6% vs. 5.9% (OR = 0.893; 95% CI, 0.404-1.976; p = 0.780), and the group S vs. group P of TNDs incidence was 32.5% vs. 31.1% (OR = 0.936; 95% CI, 0.619-0.1.415, p = 0.753). At discharge, anesthetics didn't affect the neurological endpoint. Intravenous anesthetics provided patients with better hemodynamics compared with inhalational anesthetics during MMD vascular bypass surgery (group S vs. group P, ARV
conclusionOur data indicated that both inhalational and intravenous anesthetics had protective effects on patients who underwent MMD bypass grafts. MMD patients who received inhalational anesthetics and intravenous anesthetics had similar odds of neurological deficits. When comparing long-term clinical data, most patients experience good neurological recovery after receiving inhalation or intravenous anesthesia, when compared p
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.