ReviewCureus2025
Comparison of Ventilation Strategies Across the Perioperative Period in Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
General anesthesia is a critical component of surgical procedures, requiring effective ventilation strategies to ensure adequate oxygenation and prevent complications. This narrative review aims to compare various ventilation techniques used during general anesthesia, focusing on their physiological foundations, clinical applications, and outcomes. Traditional methods, such as high tidal volume ventilation, have evolved into more sophisticated approaches, including protective lung ventilation, which are particularly beneficial for high-risk patients with respiratory comorbidities. The review highlights that protective lung ventilation, characterized by lower tidal volumes and optimal positive end-expiratory pressure, is associated with improved oxygenation, reduced incidence of post-operative pulmonary complications, and enhanced overall recovery. Despite the advantages of personalized ventilation approaches, current evidence remains limited by small sample sizes and variability in study designs. This underscores the need for larger, randomized controlled trials to establish definitive guidelines. Future research should also explore emerging technologies to optimize the real-time management of ventilation parameters. The findings emphasize the importance of individualized ventilation strategies in clinical practice to improve patient outcomes and inform policy development. By advancing our understanding of ventilation techniques, this review aims to contribute to safer anesthesia practices and enhance recovery in surgical patients.
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.