Intravenous versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia for postoperative cognitive outcomes in elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery
The use of anaesthetics in the elderly surgical population (more than 60 years of age) is increasing. Postoperative delirium, an acute condition characterized by reduced awareness of the environment and a disturbance in attention, typically occurs between 24 and 72 hours after surgery and can affect...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Cochrane database of systematic reviews Vol. 8; p. CD012317 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
England
21.08.2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 1469-493X, 1469-493X |
| Online Access: | Get more information |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Abstract | The use of anaesthetics in the elderly surgical population (more than 60 years of age) is increasing. Postoperative delirium, an acute condition characterized by reduced awareness of the environment and a disturbance in attention, typically occurs between 24 and 72 hours after surgery and can affect up to 60% of elderly surgical patients. Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a new-onset of cognitive impairment which may persist for weeks or months after surgery.Traditionally, surgical anaesthesia has been maintained with inhalational agents. End-tidal concentrations require adjustment to balance the risks of accidental awareness and excessive dosing in elderly people. As an alternative, propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) offers a more rapid recovery and reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting. Using TIVA with a target controlled infusion (TCI) allows plasma and effect-site concentrations to be calculated using an algorithm based on age, gender, weight and height of the patient.TIVA is a viable alternative to inhalational maintenance agents for surgical anaesthesia in elderly people. However, in terms of postoperative cognitive outcomes, the optimal technique is unknown.
To compare maintenance of general anaesthesia for elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery using propofol-based TIVA or inhalational anaesthesia on postoperative cognitive function, mortality, risk of hypotension, length of stay in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), and hospital stay.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2017), Embase (1974 to November 2017), PsycINFO (1887 to November 2017). We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies, and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants over 60 years of age scheduled for non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia. We planned to also include quasi-randomized trials. We compared maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia.
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and synthesized findings.
We included 28 RCTs with 4507 randomized participants undergoing different types of surgery (predominantly cardiovascular, laparoscopic, abdominal, orthopaedic and ophthalmic procedures). We found no quasi-randomized trials. Four studies are awaiting classification because we had insufficient information to assess eligibility.All studies compared maintenance with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia. Six studies were multi-arm and included additional TIVA groups, additional inhalational maintenance or both. Inhalational maintenance agents included sevoflurane (19 studies), isoflurane (eight studies), and desflurane (three studies), and was not specified in one study (reported as an abstract). Some studies also reported use of epidural analgesia/anaesthesia, fentanyl and remifentanil.We found insufficient reporting of randomization methods in many studies and all studies were at high risk of performance bias because it was not feasible to blind anaesthetists to study groups. Thirteen studies described blinding of outcome assessors. Three studies had a high of risk of attrition bias, and we noted differences in the use of analgesics between groups in six studies, and differences in baseline characteristics in five studies. Few studies reported clinical trials registration, which prevented assessment of risk of selective reporting bias.We found no evidence of a difference in incidences of postoperative delirium according to type of anaesthetic maintenance agents (odds ratio (OR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 2.26; 321 participants; five studies; very low-certainty evidence); we noted during sensitivity analysis that using different time points in one study may influence direction of this result. Thirteen studies (3215 participants) reported POCD, and of these, six studies reported data that could not be pooled; we noted no difference in scores of POCD in four of these and in one study, data were at a time point incomparable to other studies. We excluded one large study from meta-analysis because study investigators had used non-standard anaesthetic management and this study was not methodologically comparable to other studies. We combined data for seven studies and found low-certainty evidence that TIVA may reduce POCD (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87; 869 participants).We found no evidence of a difference in mortality at 30 days (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.45; 271 participants; three studies; very low-certainty evidence). Twelve studies reported intraoperative hypotension. We did not perform meta-analysis for 11 studies for this outcome. We noted visual inconsistencies in these data, which may be explained by possible variation in clinical management and medication used to manage hypotension in each study (downgraded to low-certainty evidence); one study reported data in a format that could not be combined and we noted little or no difference between groups in intraoperative hypotension for this study. Eight studies reported length of stay in the PACU, and we did not perform meta-analysis for seven studies. We noted visual inconsistencies in these data, which may be explained by possible differences in definition of time points for this outcome (downgraded to very low-certainty evidence); data were unclearly reported in one study. We found no evidence of a difference in length of hospital stay according to type of anaesthetic maintenance agent (mean difference (MD) 0 days, 95% CI -1.32 to 1.32; 175 participants; four studies; very low-certainty evidence).We used the GRADE approach to downgrade the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Reasons for downgrading included: study limitations, because some included studies insufficiently reported randomization methods, had high attrition bias, or high risk of selective reporting bias; imprecision, because we found few studies; inconsistency, because we noted heterogeneity across studies.
We are uncertain whether maintenance with propofol-based TIVA or with inhalational agents affect incidences of postoperative delirium, mortality, or length of hospital stay because certainty of the evidence was very low. We found low-certainty evidence that maintenance with propofol-based TIVA may reduce POCD. We were unable to perform meta-analysis for intraoperative hypotension or length of stay in the PACU because of heterogeneity between studies. We identified 11 ongoing studies from clinical trials register searches; inclusion of these studies in future review updates may provide more certainty for the review outcomes. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | The use of anaesthetics in the elderly surgical population (more than 60 years of age) is increasing. Postoperative delirium, an acute condition characterized by reduced awareness of the environment and a disturbance in attention, typically occurs between 24 and 72 hours after surgery and can affect up to 60% of elderly surgical patients. Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a new-onset of cognitive impairment which may persist for weeks or months after surgery.Traditionally, surgical anaesthesia has been maintained with inhalational agents. End-tidal concentrations require adjustment to balance the risks of accidental awareness and excessive dosing in elderly people. As an alternative, propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) offers a more rapid recovery and reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting. Using TIVA with a target controlled infusion (TCI) allows plasma and effect-site concentrations to be calculated using an algorithm based on age, gender, weight and height of the patient.TIVA is a viable alternative to inhalational maintenance agents for surgical anaesthesia in elderly people. However, in terms of postoperative cognitive outcomes, the optimal technique is unknown.BACKGROUNDThe use of anaesthetics in the elderly surgical population (more than 60 years of age) is increasing. Postoperative delirium, an acute condition characterized by reduced awareness of the environment and a disturbance in attention, typically occurs between 24 and 72 hours after surgery and can affect up to 60% of elderly surgical patients. Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a new-onset of cognitive impairment which may persist for weeks or months after surgery.Traditionally, surgical anaesthesia has been maintained with inhalational agents. End-tidal concentrations require adjustment to balance the risks of accidental awareness and excessive dosing in elderly people. As an alternative, propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) offers a more rapid recovery and reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting. Using TIVA with a target controlled infusion (TCI) allows plasma and effect-site concentrations to be calculated using an algorithm based on age, gender, weight and height of the patient.TIVA is a viable alternative to inhalational maintenance agents for surgical anaesthesia in elderly people. However, in terms of postoperative cognitive outcomes, the optimal technique is unknown.To compare maintenance of general anaesthesia for elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery using propofol-based TIVA or inhalational anaesthesia on postoperative cognitive function, mortality, risk of hypotension, length of stay in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), and hospital stay.OBJECTIVESTo compare maintenance of general anaesthesia for elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery using propofol-based TIVA or inhalational anaesthesia on postoperative cognitive function, mortality, risk of hypotension, length of stay in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), and hospital stay.We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2017), Embase (1974 to November 2017), PsycINFO (1887 to November 2017). We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies, and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles.SEARCH METHODSWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2017), Embase (1974 to November 2017), PsycINFO (1887 to November 2017). We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies, and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants over 60 years of age scheduled for non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia. We planned to also include quasi-randomized trials. We compared maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia.SELECTION CRITERIAWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants over 60 years of age scheduled for non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia. We planned to also include quasi-randomized trials. We compared maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia.Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and synthesized findings.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSISTwo review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and synthesized findings.We included 28 RCTs with 4507 randomized participants undergoing different types of surgery (predominantly cardiovascular, laparoscopic, abdominal, orthopaedic and ophthalmic procedures). We found no quasi-randomized trials. Four studies are awaiting classification because we had insufficient information to assess eligibility.All studies compared maintenance with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia. Six studies were multi-arm and included additional TIVA groups, additional inhalational maintenance or both. Inhalational maintenance agents included sevoflurane (19 studies), isoflurane (eight studies), and desflurane (three studies), and was not specified in one study (reported as an abstract). Some studies also reported use of epidural analgesia/anaesthesia, fentanyl and remifentanil.We found insufficient reporting of randomization methods in many studies and all studies were at high risk of performance bias because it was not feasible to blind anaesthetists to study groups. Thirteen studies described blinding of outcome assessors. Three studies had a high of risk of attrition bias, and we noted differences in the use of analgesics between groups in six studies, and differences in baseline characteristics in five studies. Few studies reported clinical trials registration, which prevented assessment of risk of selective reporting bias.We found no evidence of a difference in incidences of postoperative delirium according to type of anaesthetic maintenance agents (odds ratio (OR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 2.26; 321 participants; five studies; very low-certainty evidence); we noted during sensitivity analysis that using different time points in one study may influence direction of this result. Thirteen studies (3215 participants) reported POCD, and of these, six studies reported data that could not be pooled; we noted no difference in scores of POCD in four of these and in one study, data were at a time point incomparable to other studies. We excluded one large study from meta-analysis because study investigators had used non-standard anaesthetic management and this study was not methodologically comparable to other studies. We combined data for seven studies and found low-certainty evidence that TIVA may reduce POCD (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87; 869 participants).We found no evidence of a difference in mortality at 30 days (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.45; 271 participants; three studies; very low-certainty evidence). Twelve studies reported intraoperative hypotension. We did not perform meta-analysis for 11 studies for this outcome. We noted visual inconsistencies in these data, which may be explained by possible variation in clinical management and medication used to manage hypotension in each study (downgraded to low-certainty evidence); one study reported data in a format that could not be combined and we noted little or no difference between groups in intraoperative hypotension for this study. Eight studies reported length of stay in the PACU, and we did not perform meta-analysis for seven studies. We noted visual inconsistencies in these data, which may be explained by possible differences in definition of time points for this outcome (downgraded to very low-certainty evidence); data were unclearly reported in one study. We found no evidence of a difference in length of hospital stay according to type of anaesthetic maintenance agent (mean difference (MD) 0 days, 95% CI -1.32 to 1.32; 175 participants; four studies; very low-certainty evidence).We used the GRADE approach to downgrade the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Reasons for downgrading included: study limitations, because some included studies insufficiently reported randomization methods, had high attrition bias, or high risk of selective reporting bias; imprecision, because we found few studies; inconsistency, because we noted heterogeneity across studies.MAIN RESULTSWe included 28 RCTs with 4507 randomized participants undergoing different types of surgery (predominantly cardiovascular, laparoscopic, abdominal, orthopaedic and ophthalmic procedures). We found no quasi-randomized trials. Four studies are awaiting classification because we had insufficient information to assess eligibility.All studies compared maintenance with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia. Six studies were multi-arm and included additional TIVA groups, additional inhalational maintenance or both. Inhalational maintenance agents included sevoflurane (19 studies), isoflurane (eight studies), and desflurane (three studies), and was not specified in one study (reported as an abstract). Some studies also reported use of epidural analgesia/anaesthesia, fentanyl and remifentanil.We found insufficient reporting of randomization methods in many studies and all studies were at high risk of performance bias because it was not feasible to blind anaesthetists to study groups. Thirteen studies described blinding of outcome assessors. Three studies had a high of risk of attrition bias, and we noted differences in the use of analgesics between groups in six studies, and differences in baseline characteristics in five studies. Few studies reported clinical trials registration, which prevented assessment of risk of selective reporting bias.We found no evidence of a differen The use of anaesthetics in the elderly surgical population (more than 60 years of age) is increasing. Postoperative delirium, an acute condition characterized by reduced awareness of the environment and a disturbance in attention, typically occurs between 24 and 72 hours after surgery and can affect up to 60% of elderly surgical patients. Postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) is a new-onset of cognitive impairment which may persist for weeks or months after surgery.Traditionally, surgical anaesthesia has been maintained with inhalational agents. End-tidal concentrations require adjustment to balance the risks of accidental awareness and excessive dosing in elderly people. As an alternative, propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) offers a more rapid recovery and reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting. Using TIVA with a target controlled infusion (TCI) allows plasma and effect-site concentrations to be calculated using an algorithm based on age, gender, weight and height of the patient.TIVA is a viable alternative to inhalational maintenance agents for surgical anaesthesia in elderly people. However, in terms of postoperative cognitive outcomes, the optimal technique is unknown. To compare maintenance of general anaesthesia for elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery using propofol-based TIVA or inhalational anaesthesia on postoperative cognitive function, mortality, risk of hypotension, length of stay in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), and hospital stay. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2017), Embase (1974 to November 2017), PsycINFO (1887 to November 2017). We searched clinical trials registers for ongoing studies, and conducted backward and forward citation searching of relevant articles. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with participants over 60 years of age scheduled for non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia. We planned to also include quasi-randomized trials. We compared maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia. Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and synthesized findings. We included 28 RCTs with 4507 randomized participants undergoing different types of surgery (predominantly cardiovascular, laparoscopic, abdominal, orthopaedic and ophthalmic procedures). We found no quasi-randomized trials. Four studies are awaiting classification because we had insufficient information to assess eligibility.All studies compared maintenance with propofol-based TIVA versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia. Six studies were multi-arm and included additional TIVA groups, additional inhalational maintenance or both. Inhalational maintenance agents included sevoflurane (19 studies), isoflurane (eight studies), and desflurane (three studies), and was not specified in one study (reported as an abstract). Some studies also reported use of epidural analgesia/anaesthesia, fentanyl and remifentanil.We found insufficient reporting of randomization methods in many studies and all studies were at high risk of performance bias because it was not feasible to blind anaesthetists to study groups. Thirteen studies described blinding of outcome assessors. Three studies had a high of risk of attrition bias, and we noted differences in the use of analgesics between groups in six studies, and differences in baseline characteristics in five studies. Few studies reported clinical trials registration, which prevented assessment of risk of selective reporting bias.We found no evidence of a difference in incidences of postoperative delirium according to type of anaesthetic maintenance agents (odds ratio (OR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 2.26; 321 participants; five studies; very low-certainty evidence); we noted during sensitivity analysis that using different time points in one study may influence direction of this result. Thirteen studies (3215 participants) reported POCD, and of these, six studies reported data that could not be pooled; we noted no difference in scores of POCD in four of these and in one study, data were at a time point incomparable to other studies. We excluded one large study from meta-analysis because study investigators had used non-standard anaesthetic management and this study was not methodologically comparable to other studies. We combined data for seven studies and found low-certainty evidence that TIVA may reduce POCD (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87; 869 participants).We found no evidence of a difference in mortality at 30 days (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.33 to 4.45; 271 participants; three studies; very low-certainty evidence). Twelve studies reported intraoperative hypotension. We did not perform meta-analysis for 11 studies for this outcome. We noted visual inconsistencies in these data, which may be explained by possible variation in clinical management and medication used to manage hypotension in each study (downgraded to low-certainty evidence); one study reported data in a format that could not be combined and we noted little or no difference between groups in intraoperative hypotension for this study. Eight studies reported length of stay in the PACU, and we did not perform meta-analysis for seven studies. We noted visual inconsistencies in these data, which may be explained by possible differences in definition of time points for this outcome (downgraded to very low-certainty evidence); data were unclearly reported in one study. We found no evidence of a difference in length of hospital stay according to type of anaesthetic maintenance agent (mean difference (MD) 0 days, 95% CI -1.32 to 1.32; 175 participants; four studies; very low-certainty evidence).We used the GRADE approach to downgrade the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Reasons for downgrading included: study limitations, because some included studies insufficiently reported randomization methods, had high attrition bias, or high risk of selective reporting bias; imprecision, because we found few studies; inconsistency, because we noted heterogeneity across studies. We are uncertain whether maintenance with propofol-based TIVA or with inhalational agents affect incidences of postoperative delirium, mortality, or length of hospital stay because certainty of the evidence was very low. We found low-certainty evidence that maintenance with propofol-based TIVA may reduce POCD. We were unable to perform meta-analysis for intraoperative hypotension or length of stay in the PACU because of heterogeneity between studies. We identified 11 ongoing studies from clinical trials register searches; inclusion of these studies in future review updates may provide more certainty for the review outcomes. |
| Author | Schofield-Robinson, Oliver J Pritchard, Michael W Smith, Andrew F Shelton, Cliff L Miller, David Alderson, Phil Lewis, Sharon R |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: David surname: Miller fullname: Miller, David organization: Academic Unit, North Cumbria University Hospitals, Cumberland Infirmary, Newtown Road, Carlisle, UK, CA2 7HY – sequence: 2 givenname: Sharon R surname: Lewis fullname: Lewis, Sharon R – sequence: 3 givenname: Michael W surname: Pritchard fullname: Pritchard, Michael W – sequence: 4 givenname: Oliver J surname: Schofield-Robinson fullname: Schofield-Robinson, Oliver J – sequence: 5 givenname: Cliff L surname: Shelton fullname: Shelton, Cliff L – sequence: 6 givenname: Phil surname: Alderson fullname: Alderson, Phil – sequence: 7 givenname: Andrew F surname: Smith fullname: Smith, Andrew F |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30129968$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpNUMtOwzAQtFARfcAvVD5ySbGd1ImPqLwqVeICErdq42xao8QOdlKpf8EnY6BInGZGOzvSzJSMrLNIyJyzBWdM3PBMLnmxLBarO8ZFyvNFN5TijEziQSWZSt9G__iYTEN4ZyxVnBcXZJzGH6VkMSGfa9t7OKB1Q6AH9CGCsXtooDfOQkNbMLZHC1YjdTUFCxj6PQYDtHaedi70rkMf7Qek2u2s-WFu6LVr8TuMYlOhb460Q9c1SAcb5c4Zu6OxVKLBVwY0DYPfoT9ekvMamoBXJ5yR14f7l9VTsnl-XK9uN4nO8lQkFatVwQEhQ8lYWbNlWoqciaKWPNeSSVnoigFTy6gqmVe61FVdgqwBSlSFmJHr39zOu48hdtq2JmhsGrAYt9gKpuKuGecyWucn61C2WG07b1rwx-3fiuILTqN9ZQ |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1111_cns_70509 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11910_024_01385_4 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnins_2023_1145318 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_neuroimage_2021_117987 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnagi_2022_990679 crossref_primary_10_1111_ijcp_14266 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnagi_2021_658860 crossref_primary_10_2147_DDDT_S439543 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40266_020_00803_9 crossref_primary_10_1159_000517511 crossref_primary_10_2147_DDDT_S524319 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyt_2023_1205605 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cger_2024_03_005 crossref_primary_10_5005_jp_journals_10071_23196 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12871_023_02365_w crossref_primary_10_3389_fmed_2023_1280013 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00063_019_00635_5 crossref_primary_10_3389_fmed_2021_756366 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00101_025_01539_0 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12871_025_03019_9 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnins_2024_1431406 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnagi_2022_935716 crossref_primary_10_3389_fphar_2025_1504813 crossref_primary_10_5554_22562087_e1021 crossref_primary_10_1096_fj_202300168R crossref_primary_10_2196_15488 crossref_primary_10_3389_fimmu_2023_1102312 crossref_primary_10_1007_s41999_021_00456_w crossref_primary_10_1186_s13017_023_00519_2 crossref_primary_10_31083_j_jin2312224 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11102_020_01081_9 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnbeh_2024_1328790 crossref_primary_10_3389_fneur_2025_1526021 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13741_021_00220_5 crossref_primary_10_1177_00034894221112501 crossref_primary_10_2196_47714 crossref_primary_10_7759_cureus_85645 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00192_020_04495_y crossref_primary_10_3389_fnagi_2021_659457 crossref_primary_10_1002_brb3_70436 crossref_primary_10_1155_2021_9983988 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmj_2021_069030 crossref_primary_10_3389_fmed_2024_1353502 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyt_2024_1518460 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnagi_2022_1068278 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_anclin_2023_02_007 crossref_primary_10_1080_23279095_2023_2246612 crossref_primary_10_33523_join_2019_1_2_39 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnagi_2022_996223 crossref_primary_10_34172_PS_025_40700 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40140_021_00445_6 crossref_primary_10_1136_rapm_2023_104454 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpsyt_2022_917766 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10877_021_00783_0 crossref_primary_10_3389_fnmol_2025_1648161 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13741_022_00253_4 crossref_primary_10_1136_bmj_2024_079323 crossref_primary_10_2147_NDT_S374416 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00101_021_01083_7 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.CD012317.pub2 |
| DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1469-493X |
| ExternalDocumentID | 30129968 |
| Genre | Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review Journal Article |
| GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: Department of Health grantid: 13/89/16 |
| GroupedDBID | --- 53G 5GY 7PX 9HA ABJNI ACGFO ACGFS AENEX ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN AYR CGR CUY CVF D7G ECM EIF HYE NPM OEC OK1 P2P RWY WOW ZYTZH 7X8 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4732-d0f981aea4e600bf053b27028f617c60668cd0a0957c6d67dcbcdfba6faabe982 |
| IEDL.DBID | 7X8 |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 235 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000443635700020&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 1469-493X |
| IngestDate | Thu Jul 10 22:51:57 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 24 01:32:06 EDT 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Language | English |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4732-d0f981aea4e600bf053b27028f617c60668cd0a0957c6d67dcbcdfba6faabe982 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 ObjectType-Review-3 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-4 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD012317.pub2/pdf/full |
| PMID | 30129968 |
| PQID | 2091234116 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2091234116 pubmed_primary_30129968 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2018-08-21 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2018-08-21 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 08 year: 2018 text: 2018-08-21 day: 21 |
| PublicationDecade | 2010 |
| PublicationPlace | England |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England |
| PublicationTitle | Cochrane database of systematic reviews |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Cochrane Database Syst Rev |
| PublicationYear | 2018 |
| References | 31282577 - Anaesthesia. 2019 Aug;74(8):1069-1070. doi: 10.1111/anae.14761. 31282578 - Anaesthesia. 2019 Aug;74(8):1068. doi: 10.1111/anae.14758. |
| References_xml | – reference: 31282577 - Anaesthesia. 2019 Aug;74(8):1069-1070. doi: 10.1111/anae.14761. – reference: 31282578 - Anaesthesia. 2019 Aug;74(8):1068. doi: 10.1111/anae.14758. |
| SSID | ssj0039118 |
| Score | 2.6432204 |
| SecondaryResourceType | review_article |
| Snippet | The use of anaesthetics in the elderly surgical population (more than 60 years of age) is increasing. Postoperative delirium, an acute condition characterized... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database |
| StartPage | CD012317 |
| SubjectTerms | Aged Anesthesia, Inhalation Anesthesia, Intravenous Anesthetics, Inhalation Anesthetics, Intravenous - adverse effects Cognition - drug effects Cognition Disorders - chemically induced Delirium - chemically induced Desflurane Humans Hypotension - chemically induced Isoflurane - adverse effects Isoflurane - analogs & derivatives Methyl Ethers - adverse effects Middle Aged Postoperative Complications - chemically induced Postoperative Complications - mortality Propofol - adverse effects Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Sevoflurane Surgical Procedures, Operative |
| Title | Intravenous versus inhalational maintenance of anaesthesia for postoperative cognitive outcomes in elderly people undergoing non-cardiac surgery |
| URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30129968 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2091234116 |
| Volume | 8 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000443635700020&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1JS8QwFA5uiBf3ZdyI4DXazTY9iaiDHhw8KPRWXpMXHRjb0RkH_Bf-ZN9rO3oSBC8tPbRN05fky1u-T4hjMLSGWEAV2LNQRRFYBS40KnFJECZRTdlWi00kvZ7OsvS-dbiN2rTK6ZxYT9S2Muwjp016SpNs5Pvx-fBVsWoUR1dbCY1ZMR8SlGGrTrLvKEJIA1k31UWspBZm0wphLzj1WQNcn-mTyytGFX7Cnx_8DjPr5aa78t-GrorlFmjKi8Yy1sQMluti8a4NpW-Iz1t2605qilbJuRl06pfPMGi9g_IFmEqC-ThQVk5CCdSGZxz1QRLQlUNm5BhiQxwuv7OQZPU-pnYiP0wiS4APPmSTpi65Xu3tqaLFUpZVqUxtnEaOmsrsTfHYvX64vFGtPIMyURIGynou1T4gREioqXA0nAuubtOOUJHhjZE21gPCcHRl48SawlhXQOwACkx1sCXm6G24IyRt0h3hCC8G0FFUmIKeQrgMsfAwsA474mja1zmZP8c0oETqn_yntztiu_lh-bDh6chDdrKlsd79w917YomgEJN1q8DfF_OOBj8eiAUzGfdHb4e1XdGxd3_3BXaM3EU |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Intravenous+versus+inhalational+maintenance+of+anaesthesia+for+postoperative+cognitive+outcomes+in+elderly+people+undergoing+non-cardiac+surgery&rft.jtitle=Cochrane+database+of+systematic+reviews&rft.au=Miller%2C+David&rft.au=Lewis%2C+Sharon+R&rft.au=Pritchard%2C+Michael+W&rft.au=Schofield-Robinson%2C+Oliver+J&rft.date=2018-08-21&rft.eissn=1469-493X&rft.volume=8&rft.spage=CD012317&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2F14651858.CD012317.pub2&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F30129968&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F30129968&rft.externalDocID=30129968 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1469-493X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1469-493X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1469-493X&client=summon |