ArticleBJA open2026
General anaesthesia
Article in BJA open, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary hypertension, often indicated before surgery by elevated right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) on echocardiography, is associated with increased perioperative risk. For low-risk procedures in which either general anaesthesia or monitored anaesthesia care may be selected, comparative data on postoperative outcomes are limited. Methods: We conducted a single-centre retrospective observational cohort study of 4962 adults with RVSP >50 mm Hg who underwent low-risk procedures. Eligible procedures included endoscopy, bronchoscopy, catheterisation laboratory interventions, and peripheral surgeries. The primary outcome was a composite of acute kidney injury, acute myocardial injury, or 30-day mortality. Analyses used multivariable logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting based on preoperative covariates. Intraoperative variables were evaluated as potential mediators in sensitivity analyses. Results: Of the 4962 patients, 2473 received general anaesthesia and 2489 received monitored anaesthesia care. In preoperative-adjusted models, general anaesthesia was associated with higher odds of major complications (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.02-1.51; Conclusions: After adjustment for preoperative risk and evaluating intraoperative mediators, we found no evidence of a statistically significant difference in major postoperative complications between general anaesthesia and monitored anaesthesia care in adults with elevated RVSP undergoing low-risk procedures.
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.