Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
May inform anesthesia monitoring choices; leaves open prospective outcome validation in high-risk patients.
Minimal mandatory monitoring in the perioperative period recommended by Association of Anesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland and American Society of Anesthesiologists are universally acknowledged and has become an integral part of the anesthesia practice. The technologies in perioperative monitoring have advanced, and the availability and clinical applications have multiplied exponentially. Newer monitoring techniques include depth of anesthesia monitoring, goal-directed fluid therapy, transesophageal echocardiography, advanced neurological monitoring, improved alarm system and technological advancement in objective pain assessment. Various factors that need to be considered with the use of improved monitoring techniques are their validation data, patient outcome, safety profile, cost-effectiveness, awareness of the possible adverse events, knowledge of technical principle and ability of the convenient routine handling. In this review, we will discuss the new monitoring techniques in anesthesia, their advantages, deficiencies, limitations, their comparison to the conventional methods and their effect on patient outcome, if any.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chilkoti et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: