ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025
Recording rates of high-frequency variability index monitoring and use of vasoactive medications in daily clinical practice: A prospective observational study.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of remimazolam and propofol on parasympathetic activity during general anesthesia induction in patients with severe aortic stenosis: a randomized controlled trial utilizing high-frequency variability index.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: To assess data recording rates of the high-frequency variability index (HFVI), which becomes less reliable with vasoactive medication use, and examine the use of vasoactive medications in daily clinical practice. The hypothesis is that when an HFVI sensor is applied and anaesthesia management is left to the discretion of the anaesthesiologist in charge, HFVI interpretation would be limited. Methods: Patients aged ≥65 years who underwent elective major abdominal surgery for malignant disease under general anaesthesia in those scheduled for surgery for >2 h were eligible. The anaesthesiologists managed patients with HFVI sensors attached at their discretion, without any limitations on vasoactive medication use. The primary outcome was the HFVI data-recording rate. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative bolus and continuous use of vasoactive medications (ephedrine, phenylephrine, atropine, and noradrenaline). The percentage of administration time was calculated by dividing the total administration time by the surgery time. Results: Of 249 eligible patients, HFVI sensors were successfully attached with a mean data recording rate of 73.1% (95% confidence interval: 70.5%, 5.7%). Two hundred and ten patients received at least one administration of vasoactive medications during the assessment period, and ephedrine was dominant. Sixty-one patients received continuous administration of phenylephrine and noradrenaline, and the ratios of continuous administration time to the total surgical time were 77.8% and 84.9%, respectively. Conclusion: The data recording rate of HFVI in routine clinical practice was approximately 70%, and many patients were given vasoactive medications; thus, caution must be taken when interpreting HFVI in routine clinical practice.
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.