ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Perioperative anesthetic management in patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses: a retrospective analysis of 21 cases.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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.
- Perioperative Anesthetic Challenges and Multidisciplinary Management of a Massive Intra-Abdominal Tumor.Journal of medical cases · 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
Objective: To summarize perioperative anesthetic management in patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses. Methods: Perioperative data from 21 patients who underwent resection of giant abdominal masses between January 2016 and December 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Descriptive statistical methods and stratified comparative analyses were applied to evaluate perioperative characteristics and outcomes. Results: The maximum tumor diameter ranged from 15 to 50 cm. Tumors originated from the abdominal wall in 8 cases (38.10%), the abdominopelvic cavity in 6 cases (28.57%), and the retroperitoneum in 7 cases (33.33%). Pathological diagnoses predominantly included malignant tumors in 11 cases (52.38%) and borderline tumors in 7 cases (33.33%). General anesthesia was administered to all 21 patients, with single-lumen endotracheal intubation used in 16 cases (76.2%). Intraoperative monitoring consisted of invasive arterial pressure monitoring in 16 cases (76.2%), central venous pressure monitoring in 15 cases (71.4%), and FloTrac-based cardiac output monitoring in 8 cases (38.1%). Operative duration ranged from 110 to 440 min, and massive hemorrhage (≥ 1,000 mL) occurred in 57.1% of patients. Postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) stay ranged from 0 to 12 days, while postoperative hospital stay ranged from 7 to 58 days. Stratified analyses indicated that patients with retroperitoneal masses presented with higher preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, larger tumor diameter, and longer ICU and hospital stays. Patients with malignant tumors were older and demonstrated higher ASA classification, longer operative duration, and prolonged ICU stay. Conclusion: Anesthetic management for resection of giant abdominal masses requires individualized strategies. Preoperative multidisciplinary consultation and interventional embolization may reduce surgical risk. Intraoperative advanced hemodynamic monitoring and meticulous volume management warrant particular attention.
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.