ReviewJournal of orthopaedic translation2026
Perioperative interventions in preventing postoperative delirium following orthopaedic surgery in the elderly: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 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.
- Emerging mechanisms and translational advances in musculoskeletal diseases.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 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: Postoperative delirium (POD) is an acute neuropsychiatric syndrome that occurs following surgery, characterized by inattention and broader cognitive deficits. This study aimed to synthesize randomized evidence on perioperative strategies that prevent POD in elderly patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to March 2026. Eligible trials enrolled adults aged 60 years or older undergoing orthopaedic surgery and reported POD incidence with validated assay assessments. Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences with 95% Credible Interval (CrI) were estimated. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Results: 79 RCTs comprising 16,012 patients were included. Compared with placebo, dexmedetomidine (RR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.39-0.61) has the most consistent evidence for reducing the risk of POD incidence, while ketamine (RR 0.39, 95% CrI 0.23-0.64), rivastigmine (RR 0.33, 95% CrI 0.16-0.65), olanzapine (RR 0.35, 95% CrI 0.17-0.71), and lidocaine (RR 0.41, 95% CrI 0.21-0.77) showed promising but heterogeneous benefits across current literature. Evidence for analgesic and anaesthetic interventions was limited. Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine offers the most substantial evidence for lowering POD incidence after orthopaedic surgery in elderly; ketamine, rivastigmine, olanzapine, and lidocaine warrant further evaluation. High-quality, low-bias RCTs are needed to verify the effects of specific analgesic or anaesthetic regimens on POD occurrence. Translational potential statement: This network meta-analysis highlights the promising translational potential of dexmedetomidine in preventing POD for elderly orthopaedic patients. Dexmedetomidine emerges as the most reliable option for immediate clinical adoption, while ketamine, rivastigmine, olanzapine, and lidocaine show promise but require confirmatory trials before routine use. The findings set the stage for personalized anaesthetic protocols that minimize POD and its associated morbidity and healthcare costs.
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.