ReviewJournal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care2025
A SIAARTI Neuroanesthesia and Neurointensive Care Section survey on elective neurosurgery and interventional neuroradiology.
Review in Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe data available at the national level in Italy regarding elective neurosurgical and neuroradiological procedures are limited. This survey aimed to explore clinical practices across Italian centers, focusing on anesthetic strategies, monitoring, and postoperative management.
methodsA nationwide survey was conducted, collecting data from centers performing elective craniotomies and interventional neuroradiology. Questions addressed procedural volumes, anesthesia type, monitoring tools, and intraoperative and postoperative management.
resultsAmong 49 responding centers, 21 were high-volume (>150 craniotomies/year). Intravenous anesthesia was the preferred anesthesia method, though not uniformly applied across volume groups. Awake craniotomy was rarely performed, even in high-volume centers. Bispectral Index™ monitoring was reported in 71.7% of centers, but without correlation to center volume. Anti-epileptic prophylaxis was routinely used in 73.9% of high-volume centers. Practices regarding intraoperative awakening and postoperative computer tomography scans varied widely: 53.5% performed them routinely in the postoperative period. In addition, 42.5% of physicians still adopted delayed awakening for neuroprotection purposes. Intensive care unit admission was not universally applied, reflecting a growing trend toward selective monitoring and enhanced recovery protocols. DISCUSSION: Large-volume centers do not always align with the best evidence available, albeit the limitation in the literature. In many centers, there is still indiscriminate use of anti-epileptic prophylaxis, admission to the critical care unit after craniotomy, and computed tomography in conscious patients in the immediate postoperative period: habits and preferences, however, for which there are no clear and consistent answers in the literature.
conclusionsThis survey reveals significant heterogeneity in the anesthetic and perioperative practices across Italian centers, independent of surgical volume. The absence of a dedicated national database limits broader analysis. Establishing such a registry could guide protocol standardization, training, and resource optimization in elective neurosurgical and neuroradiological care.
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.