MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220784662 · doi:10.1111/anae.15718

Postoperative outcomes in surgical patients with obstructive sleep apnoea diagnosed by sleep studies: a meta‐analysis and trial sequential analysis

2022· review· en· W4220784662 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSt Joseph's Health CareWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity Health Network
KeywordsMedicinePolysomnographyAtrial fibrillationMeta-analysisOdds ratioProspective cohort studyRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaInternal medicineSurgeryApnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying surgical patients with obstructive sleep apnoea may assist with anaesthetic management to minimise postoperative complications. Using trial sequential analysis, we evaluated the impact of obstructive sleep apnoea diagnosed by polysomnography or home sleep apnoea testing on postoperative outcomes in surgical patients. Multiple databases were systematically searched. Outcomes included: total postoperative complications, systemic complications (cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, renal, infectious) and specific complications (atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, combined hospital and intensive care unit re-admission, mortality). The pooled odds ratios of postoperative complications were evaluated by the Mantel-Haenszel method random-effects model. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted, and the GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. Twenty prospective cohort studies with 3756 patients (2127 obstructive sleep apnoea and 1629 non-obstructive sleep apnoea) were included (9 in non-cardiac surgery and 11 in cardiac surgery). Postoperative complications were almost two-fold higher with obstructive sleep apnoea, OR (95%CI) 1.92 (1.52-2.42), p < 0.001; certainty of evidence, moderate. Obstructive sleep apnoea was associated with a 1.5 times increased risk of postoperative cardiovascular complications, OR (95%CI) 1.56 (1.20-2.02), p = 0.001; certainty of evidence, moderate; an almost two-fold increase in respiratory complications, OR (95%CI) 1.91 (1.39-2.62), p < 0.001; certainty of evidence, moderate; and hospital and ICU re-admission, OR (95%CI) 2.25 (1.21-4.19), p = 0.01; certainty of evidence, low. Trial sequential analysis showed adequate information size for postoperative complications. Baseline confounding factors were adjusted by meta-regression, and the sub-group analysis did not materially change our results. This increased risk occurred especially in patients in whom obstructive sleep apnoea had been newly diagnosed, emphasising the importance of pre-operative screening.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it