ArticleOtology & neurotology open2025
Assessment of Anesthetic Modalities in Otologic Surgery.
Article in Otology & neurotology open, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Otologic surgery has specific anesthetic requirements such as avoiding nitrous oxide and allowing facial nerve monitoring, but lacks clear criteria for an optimal anesthetic regimen, often relying on anesthesiologist preference. Study Design: This study is a retrospective review of 600 primary cochlear implant surgeries and anesthetic variables. Setting: This study was conducted in a tertiary academic medical center. Methods: Univariate, multivariate, and cluster analyses of anesthetic regimen association with clinical metrics of postoperative recovery. Results: Among 600 cochlear implant surgeries, anesthesia regimens included balanced (combination of gas and intravenous agents) (84.3%), gas alone (13.5%), and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) (2.2%). By univariate analysis, emergence from anesthesia was shortest with TIVA (11.9 ± 4.6 minutes) and longest with gas (14.2 ± 5.3 minutes), although not reaching statistical significance. Univariate analyses also failed to show a significant correlation between anesthesia regimen and phase I recovery or phase II duration. Multivariate regression indicated significantly shorter emergence times with TIVA compared with gas alone (coeff: -5.29, Conclusion: TIVA anesthetic regimen is associated with shorter emergence time than gas alone, although the difference in time is small. Balanced regimens are most used among anesthesiologists, and limiting remifentanil dosage may shorten emergence and recovery times.
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.