Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19874582›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2009

Incidence of propofol-related infusion syndrome in critically ill adults: a prospective, multicenter study.

Russel J Roberts, Jeffrey F Barletta, Jeffrey J Fong, Greg Schumaker, Philip J Kuper, Stella Papadopoulos, Dinesh Yogaratnam, Elise Kendall, Renee Xamplas, Anthony T Gerlach and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed
10.0field-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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 208 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Volatile anesthetics in the intensive care unit.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Russel J RobertsDepartment of Pharmacy, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA 02111, USA. rroberts@tuftsmedicalcenter.org
Jeffrey F Barletta
Jeffrey J Fong
Greg Schumaker
Philip J Kuper
Stella Papadopoulos
Dinesh Yogaratnam
Elise Kendall
Renee Xamplas
Anthony T Gerlach
Paul M Szumita
Kevin E Anger
Paul A Arpino
Stacey A Voils
Philip Grgurich
Robin Ruthazer
John W Devlin
Tufts Medical Center · USBoston Medical Center · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USConcord Hospital · USCorewell Health Blodgett Hospital · USJohn H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMCPHS University · USNortheastern University · USThe Ohio State University · USUMass Memorial Medical Center · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWhile propofol is associated with an infusion syndrome (PRIS) that may cause death, the incidence of PRIS is unknown. Determining the incidence of PRIS and the frequency of PRIS-related clinical manifestations are key steps prior to the completion of any controlled studies investigating PRIS. This prospective, multicenter study sought to determine the incidence of PRIS and PRIS-related clinical manifestations in a large cohort of critically ill adults prescribed propofol.

methodsCritically ill adults from 11 academic medical centers administered an infusion of propofol for [>or=] 24 hours were monitored at baseline and then on a daily basis until propofol was discontinued for the presence of 11 different PRIS-associated clinical manifestations and risk factors derived from 83 published case reports of PRIS.

resultsAmong 1017 patients [medical (35%), neurosurgical (25%)], PRIS (defined as metabolic acidosis plus cardiac dysfunction and [>or=] 1 of: rhabdomyolysis, hypertriglyceridemia or renal failure occurring after the start of propofol therapy) developed in 11 (1.1%) patients an average of 3 (1-6) [median (range)] days after the start of propofol. While most (91%) of the patients who developed PRIS were receiving a vasopressor (80% initiated after the start of propofol therapy), few received a propofol dose >83 mcg/kg/min (18%) or died (18%). Compared to the 1006 patients who did not develop PRIS, the APACHE II score (25 +/- 6 vs 20 +/- 7, P = 0.01) was greater in patients with PRIS but both the duration of propofol use (P = 0.43) and ICU length of stay (P = 0.82) were similar.

conclusionsDespite using a conservative definition for PRIS, and only considering new-onset PRIS clinical manifestations, the incidence of PRIS slightly exceeds 1%. Future controlled studies focusing on evaluating whether propofol manifests the derangements of critical illness more frequently than other sedatives will need to be large. These studies should also investigate the mechanism(s) and risk factors for PRIS.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessIncidenceAcademic Medical CentersAdultAgedAnesthetics, IntravenousArrhythmias, CardiacFemaleHeart FailureHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedPropofolProspective StudiesSyndromeAnesthetics, IntravenousPropofol

Identifiers

PMID19874582
PMCPMC2784401
OpenAlexW1988163197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.