Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19220277›Full record

SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2009

Pain on injection with microemulsion propofol.

Ji-Yeon Sim, Soo-Han Lee, Do-Yang Park, Jin-Ah Jung, Kyoung-Ho Ki, Dong-Ho Lee, Gyu-Jeong Noh

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04673500 (Comparison of Large Antecubital Vein Versus Small Vein on Dorsum of Hand for the Prevention of Propofol Injection Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT04673500 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Large Antecubital Vein Versus Small Vein on Dorsum of Hand for the Prevention of Propofol Injection Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorKing Khalid University HospitalRan2013 to 2014Enrolled160ConditionsInjection Site IrritationArmsPropofol lidocaine through large vein, Propofol lidocaine through small vein
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. ADMET & DMPK · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Effectiveness of Different Doses of Tenoxicam in Preventing Propofol Injection Pain.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ji-Yeon SimDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Asan Medical Centre, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Soo-Han Lee
Do-Yang Park
Jin-Ah Jung
Kyoung-Ho Ki
Dong-Ho Lee
Gyu-Jeong Noh
Ulsan College · KRUniversity of Ulsan · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo evaluate the incidence and severity of injection pain caused by microemulsion propofol and lipid emulsion propofol in relation to plasma bradykinin generation and aqueous free propofol concentrations.

methodsInjection pain was evaluated in 147 patients. Aqueous free propofol concentrations in each formulation, and in formulation mixtures containing agents that reduce propofol-induced pain, were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Plasma bradykinin concentrations in both formulations and in their components mixed with blood sampled from six volunteers were measured by radioimmunoassays. Injection pain caused by 8% polyethylene glycol 660 hydroxystearate (PEG660 HS) was evaluated in another 10 volunteers.

resultsThe incidence of injection pain [visual analogue scale (VAS) >30 mm] caused by microemulsion and lipid emulsion propofol was 69.7 and 42.3% (P < 0.001), respectively. The median VAS scores for microemulsion and lipid emulsion propofol were 59 and 24 mm, respectively (95% confidence interval for the difference 12.5, 40.0). The aqueous free propofol concentration of microemulsion propofol was seven times higher than that of lipid emulsion propofol. Agents that reduce injection pain did not affect aqueous free propofol concentrations. Microemulsion propofol and 8% PEG660 HS enhanced plasma bradykinin generation, whereas lipid emulsion propofol and lipid solvent did not. PEG660 HS did not cause injection pain.

conclusionsHigher aqueous free propofol concentrations of microemulsion propofol produce more frequent and severe pain. The plasma kallikrein-kinin system may not be involved, and the agents that reduce injection pain may not act by decreasing aqueous free propofol concentrations.

Indexed as

Pain MeasurementAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBradykininChromatography, High Pressure LiquidEmulsionsFemaleHumansInjections, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedOsmolar ConcentrationPainPropofolSingle-Blind MethodBradykininEmulsionsPropofol

Identifiers

PMID19220277
PMCPMC2675042
OpenAlexW2020730702

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.