Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31490337›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurosurgical anesthesiology2020

Anesthesia and Cognitive Outcome in Elderly Patients: A Narrative Viewpoint.

James E Cottrell, John Hartung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Awake Percutaneous Cervical Cordotomy in Patients With Cancer: A Technical Report.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

James E CottrellDepartment of Anesthesiology, State University of New York, Downstate Health Sciences Center, Brooklyn, NY.
John Hartung

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Better ways to manage preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative care of surgical patients is the bailiwick of anesthesiologists. Although we care for patients of all ages, protecting the cognitive capacity of elderly patients more frequently requires procedures and practices that go beyond routine care for nonelderly adults. This narrative review will consider current understanding of the reasons that elderly patients need enhanced care, and recommendations for that care based on established and recent empirical research. In that latter regard, unless and until we are able to classify anesthetic neurotoxicity as a rare complication, the first-do-no-harm approach should: (1) add anesthesia to surgical intervention on the physiological cost side of the cost/benefit ratio when making decisions about whether and when to proceed with surgery; (2) minimize anesthetic depth and periods of electroencephalographic suppression; (3) limit the duration of continuous anesthesia whenever possible; (4) consider the possibility that regional anesthesia with deep sedation may be as neurotoxic as general anesthesia; and (5) when feasible, use regional anesthesia with light or no sedation.

Indexed as

CognitionAgedAged, 80 and overAnesthesiaCognition DisordersHumansPostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID31490337
PMCPMC6919225

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.