Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21445642›Full record

Trial reportIntensive care medicine2011

Long-term sedation in intensive care unit: a randomized comparison between inhaled sevoflurane and intravenous propofol or midazolam.

Malcie Mesnil, Xavier Capdevila, Sophie Bringuier, Pierre-Olivier Trine, Yoan Falquet, Jonathan Charbit, Jean-Paul Roustan, Gerald Chanques, Samir Jaber

6 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 6 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 68 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
11.5field-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.

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)
NCT05312385 phase3completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled, Open Label, Assessor-Blinded Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Inhaled Isoflurane Delivered Via the Sedaconda ACD-S Compared to Intravenous Propofol for Sedation of Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Unit Adult Patients (INSPiRE-ICU1)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSedana MedicalRan2022 to 2024Enrolled277ConditionsSedationArmsIsoflurane, Propofol, Isoflurane (run-ins)
NCT05327296 phase3completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled, Open Label, Assessor-Blinded Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Inhaled Isoflurane Delivered Via the Sedaconda ACD-S Compared to Intravenous Propofol for Sedation of Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Unit Adult Patients (INSPiRE-ICU2)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSedana MedicalRan2022 to 2024Enrolled282ConditionsSedationArmsIsoflurane, Propofol
NCT05586126 terminatednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

AnaConDa-therapy in COVID-19 Patients

TypeobservationalSponsorJeroen Bosch ZiekenhuisRan2020 to 2022Enrolled42ConditionsCOVID-19, SARS CoV-2ArmsSevoflurane
NCT06809218 phase3active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

INSPiRE-ICU 1 & 2: A Pooled Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes at 3 and 6 Months After Inhaled Isoflurane Delivered Via the Sedaconda ACD-S Compared to Intravenous Propofol for Sedation of Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Unit Adult Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorSedana MedicalRan2022 to 2025Enrolled312ConditionsPost-Intensive Care Syndrome, SedationArmsInhaled isoflurane administered by Sedaconda ACD-S, Intravenous infusion of propofol
NCT07734350 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Cost-effectiveness of Inhaled Sedation Versus Intravenous Propofol in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Patients: a Retrospective ICU Study

TypeobservationalSponsorHospital H+ QueretaroRan2026 to 2026Enrolled400ConditionsCritical Illness, Mechanical Ventilation, Respiratory InsufficiencyArmsIsoflurane, Propofol (Astra-Zeneca)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 217 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Inhaled sevoflurane in critically ill COVID-19 patients: A retrospective cohort study.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Inhaled Anesthetics: Beyond the Operating Room.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Malcie MesnilDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Lapeyronie (DAR A), Montpellier I University and Montpellier University Lapeyronie Hospital, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Equipe soutenue par la Région et l'Inserm (ERI) -25, Route de Ganges, 34295 Montpellier, Cedex 5, France.
Xavier Capdevila
Sophie Bringuier
Pierre-Olivier Trine
Yoan Falquet
Jonathan Charbit
Jean-Paul Roustan
Gerald Chanques
Samir Jaber
Inserm · FRUniversité de Montpellier · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate efficacy and adverse events related to inhaled sevoflurane for long-term sedation compared with standard intravenous (i.v.) sedation with propofol or midazolam.

methodsRandomized controlled trial. Sixty intensive care unit (ICU) patients expected to require more than 24 h sedation were randomly assigned to one of three groups: group S, inhaled sevoflurane; group P, i.v. propofol; group M, i.v. midazolam. All patients also received i.v. remifentanil for goal-directed sedation (Ramsay scale and pain score) until extubation or for a maximum of 96 h. Primary end points were wake-up times and extubation delay from termination of sedative administration. Proportion of time within Ramsay score 3-4, i.v. morphine consumption at 24 h post extubation, hallucination episodes after end of sedation, adverse events, inorganic fluoride plasma levels, and ambient sevoflurane concentrations were recorded.

resultsForty-seven patients were analyzed. Wake-up time and extubation delay were significantly (P<0.01) shorter in group S (18.6 ± 11.8 and 33.6 ± 13.1 min) than in group P (91.3 ± 35.2 and 326.11 ± 360.2 min) or M (260.2 ± 150.2 and 599.6 ± 586.6 min). Proportion of time within desired interval of sedation score was comparable between groups. Morphine consumption during the 24 h following extubation was lower in group S than in groups P and M. Four hallucination episodes were reported in group P, five in group M, and none in group S (P=0.04). No hepatic or renal adverse events were reported. Mean plasma fluoride value was 82 μmol l(-1) (range 12-220 μmol l(-1)), and mean ambient sevoflurane concentration was 0.3 ± 0.1 ppm.

conclusionsLong-term inhaled sevoflurane sedation seems to be a safe and effective alternative to i.v. propofol or midazolam. It decreases wake-up and extubation times, and post extubation morphine consumption, and increases awakening quality.

Indexed as

AdultAnesthetics, InhalationAnesthetics, IntravenousFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesIntensive Care UnitsMaleMethyl EthersMidazolamMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePropofolRespiration, ArtificialSevofluraneVentilator WeaningAnesthetics, InhalationAnesthetics, IntravenousHypnotics and SedativesMethyl EthersMidazolamPropofolSevoflurane

Identifiers

PMID21445642
OpenAlexW2139146091

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.