ArticleMedizinische Klinik (Munich, Germany : 1983)2009
[Long-term therapy with propofol has no impact on microcirculation in medical intensive care patients].
Article in Medizinische Klinik (Munich, Germany : 1983), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicrocirculation has become a major focus of research in critical care medicine due to its growing clinical relevance detecting changes in organ perfusion at an early stage. A negative impact of propofol infusion on microcirculation during short-term anesthesia was described recently. The influence of long-term sedation with propofol on microflow of critical care patients is still unclear. PATIENTS AND
methodsMicroflow was analyzed using sidestream darkfield microscopy of sublingual mucosa in 28 patients of whom eleven received continuous infusion of propofol. According to current guidelines, microflow was recorded digitally. Quantitative analysis was performed offline in a semiquantitative way (0: no flow; 1: intermittent flow; 2: sluggish flow; 3: continuous flow).
resultsGood microflow rates were detected in sublingual vessels (10-100 microm) in hemodynamically stable, medical intensive care patients. In the majority of cases, continuous flow profiles were recorded. There was no difference in flow rates between patients with and without propofol therapy.
conclusionIn hemodynamically stable intensive care patients, long-term therapy with propofol did not affect sublingual microflow in this small cohort. However, intensive care physicians should keep such possible interactions in mind avoiding administration of these substances in patients with manifested shock. The effects of propofol in hemodynamically impaired patients should be evaluated in further studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.