Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18500419›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2008

Short-term sevoflurane sedation using the Anaesthetic Conserving Device after cardiothoracic surgery.

Kerstin D Röhm, Michael W Wolf, Thilo Schöllhorn, Alexander Schellhaass, Joachim Boldt, Swen N Piper

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
51.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT01802255 phase3withdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

Study of the Safety of Administration of Sevoflurane for Long-term Critically Ill Patients Sedation Undergoing Mechanical Ventilation. Prospective, Controlled, Randomized, Multicenter, Clinical Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorF Javier BeldaRan2013 to 2015Enrolled0ConditionsPoisoning by Inhaled Anaesthetic, Fluoride Poisoning, Recovery From Sedation, Renal FunctionArmsSevoflurane, Midazolam
NCT02889055 terminatednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Mirus™ for Sedation in Resuscitation

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GrenobleRan2016 to 2016Enrolled9ConditionsPatient Requiring Mechanical VentilationArmspatient requiring the MIRUS (mechanical ventilation)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 266 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Inhaled volatile anesthetics in the intensive care unit.World journal of critical care medicine · 2024
    Review
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kerstin D RöhmDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Bremserstrasse 79, 67063, Ludwigshafen, Germany. k.d.roehm@web.de
Michael W Wolf
Thilo Schöllhorn
Alexander Schellhaass
Joachim Boldt
Swen N Piper
Klinikum Ludwigshafen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe evaluated the procedure of postoperative inhalational sedation with sevoflurane using the Anaesthetic Conserving Device (ACD) with regard to recovery times, feasibility and consumption of anaesthetics in comparison to propofol. DESIGN AND

settingProspective, randomised, single-blinded, controlled study in a surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of a 1,000-bed academic hospital. PATIENTS AND

interventionsA total of 70 patients after elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery either received sevoflurane via ACD (n = 35) or propofol (n = 35) for short-term postoperative sedation in the ICU. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsThe primary endpoint was extubation time from termination of sedation. Recovery times, consumption of anaesthetics, endtidal sevoflurane concentrations, length of ICU and hospital stay, and side effects were documented. Mean recovery times were significantly shorter with sevoflurane than with propofol (extubation time: 22 vs. 151 min; following commands: 7 vs. 42 min). The mean (SD) sevoflurane consumption was 3.2 +/- 1.4 mL/h to obtain mean endtidal concentrations of 0.76 vol%. No serious complications occurred during sedation with either sedative drug. The length of ICU stay was comparable in both groups, but hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the sevoflurane group. Drug costs (in Euro) for sedation per patient were similar in both groups (sevoflurane: 15.1 +/- 9.5 <euro>; propofol: 12.5 +/- 5.8 <euro>), while sevoflurane sedation costs that included use of the ACD were significantly higher.

conclusionsSevoflurane administration via ACD is an effective and safe alternative to propofol to provide postoperative short-term ICU sedation. Recovery from sedation was facilitated with sevoflurane instead of propofol and resulted in shorter extubation and ventilator times. DESCRIPTOR: Neurology/sedation, Sedation and anaesthesia.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, InhalationAnesthetics, IntravenousMethyl EthersPropofolAgedAnesthesiologyCoronary Artery BypassDeep SedationEquipment DesignFemaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsIntraoperative CareLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedAnesthetics, InhalationAnesthetics, IntravenousMethyl EthersPropofolSevoflurane

Identifiers

PMID18500419
OpenAlexW2041441379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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 OpenQuestion graph.