ArticleFrontiers in neurology2026
Early dexmedetomidine and postoperative RASS-defined examinability after microsurgical clipping for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a time-resolved 24-h landmark cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: After microsurgical clipping for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH), sedation should preserve neurological examinability without compromising hemodynamics or nimodipine delivery. We examined whether early postoperative dexmedetomidine was associated with a greater post-landmark RASS-defined examinability. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed adults with aSAH treated with clipping at one center from October 2021 to October 2025. Early dexmedetomidine was initiation within 24 h after clipping and continuation for at least 2 h. Exposure was classified during 0-24 h. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted proportion of observed 24-72 h time in RASS-defined examinability defined without reference to the contemporaneous ordered target (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale [RASS] -2 to 0). Ordered-target attainment was the key secondary endpoint. Hour-level states were modeled in consecutive 6-h bins using generalized estimating equations (GEE); target-conditional and shared examinable-target-band analyses tested whether easier prescription targets explained the association. The endpoint hierarchy was finalized after data analysis during peer review; the study was not preregistered, no multiplicity adjustment was applied, and all estimates are exploratory. Results: Among 123 eligible patients, 120 were alive and classifiable at 24 h; 41 received early dexmedetomidine and 79 did not. Examinable time during 24-72 h was 68% versus 55% (Hodges-Lehmann location shift, 12 percentage points; 95% CI, 5-19), and the GEE-adjusted marginal difference was 11.8 points (95% CI, 4.1-19.5). Early users had less post-landmark deep-sedation time; post-landmark co-sedative exposure, dose, and duration differences were directionally lower but imprecise. Ordered-target attainment was directionally concordant; the primary association remained after adding ordered-target stratum and in the shared-target restriction. Window-specific differences were 15.2 points (95% CI, 6.0-24.4) and 6.3 points (95% CI, -2.4 to 15.0); the exposure-by-window interaction was imprecise (difference-in-differences, 8.9 points; 95% CI, -3.6 to 21.4; Conclusion: The principal finding was greater post-landmark RASS-defined examinability; related care-process and co-sedative measures were not independent validation. Its descriptive concentration during 24-48 h was not confirmed by the formal interaction test and remains hypothesis-generating, with bradycardia as the principal trade-off. The findings remain vulnerable to confounding by indication and do not establish a drug-specific causal effect or downstream clinical benefit.
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.