You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
| Title |
Effectiveness of combined regional-general anesthesia for reducing mortality in coronary artery bypass: meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.05.012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fabiano Timbó Barbosa, Rafael Martins da Cunha, Fernando Wagner da Silva Ramos, Fernando José Camello de Lima, Amanda Karine Barros Rodrigues, Ailton Mota do Nascimento Galvão, Célio Fernando de Sousa-Rodrigues, Paula Monique Barbosa Lima |
| Abstract |
Neuraxial anesthesia (NA) has been used in association with general anesthesia (GA) for coronary artery bypass; however, anticoagulation during surgery makes us question the viability of benefits by the risk of epidural hematoma. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analyzes examining the efficacy of NA associated with GA compared to GA alone for coronary artery bypass on mortality reduction. Mortality, arrhythmias, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI), length of hospital stay (LHS), length of ICU stay (ICUS), reoperations, blood transfusion (BT), quality of life, satisfaction degree, and postoperative cognitive dysfunction were analyzed. The weighted mean difference (MD) was estimated for continuous variables, and relative risk (RR) and risk difference (RD) for categorical variables. 17 original articles analyzed. Meta-analysis of mortality (RD=-0.01, 95% CI=-0.03 to 0.01), CVA (RR=0.79, 95% CI=0.32-1.95), MI (RR=0.96, 95% CI=0.52-1.79) and LHS (MD=-1.94, 95% CI=-3.99 to 0.12) were not statistically significant. Arrhythmia was less frequent with NA (RR=0.68, 95% CI=0.50-0.93). ICUS was lower in NA (MD=-2.09, 95% CI=-2.92 to -1.26). There was no significant difference in mortality. Combined NA and GA showed lower incidence of arrhythmias and lower ICUS. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 18% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Researcher | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 12% |
| Psychology | 3 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |