Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22843306›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers of medicine2012

Comparative cost analysis of three different anesthesia methods in gynecological laparoscopic surgery.

Xiaohui Chi, Yeling Chen, Mingfeng Liao, Fei Cao, Yuke Tian, Xueren Wang

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers of medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Cost-effectiveness of different regimens of anesthesia for day surgery in China.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2014
    Article
  6. Cost identification analysis of general anesthesia.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
    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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaohui ChiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Yeling Chen
Mingfeng Liao
Fei Cao
Yuke Tian
Xueren Wang
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CNTongji Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the current study, we assessed and evaluated the costs and benefits of three popular methods of general anesthesia practiced in our department for gynecological laparoscopic surgery in recent years. Sixty adult female patients who underwent elective gynecological laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia were randomly divided into three groups: group V, group I and group C. In group V, anesthesia was induced intravenously with midazolam, remifentanil, propofol and vecuronium, and maintained with continuous infusion of propofol and remifentanil. In group I, anesthesia was intravenously induced with midazolam, fentanyl, propofol and vecuronium, and maintained with inhaled isoflurane and intravenous bonus of fentanyl. In group C, anesthesia was induced as in group I, but maintained with isoflurane inhalation combined with propofolremifentanil infusion. All patients received vecuronium for muscle relaxation. Perioperative incidences of complications and total anesthesia costs for patients in all groups were recorded. In addition, postoperative satisfaction of the patients was also noted, and similar outcomes of the satisfaction were reported in all 60 patients. Although there was no statistical significance among groups, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting were higher in group C, and the rates of shivering and the needs for analgesics were higher in group V. Anesthesia costs in group I were the lowest. Therefore, it is concluded that the costs of anesthesia induced with midazolam, fentanyl, propofol, vecuronium, and maintained with isoflurane, fentanyl and vecuronium are cheapest, and there is no significant difference in patients' satisfaction and safety among the three above-mentioned methods of anesthesia in our department.

Indexed as

Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresLaparoscopyOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAnalysis of VarianceAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia, InhalationAnesthesia, IntravenousAnestheticsAnesthetics, InhalationAnesthetics, IntravenousCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleHumansAnestheticsAnesthetics, InhalationAnesthetics, IntravenousMuscle Relaxants, Central

Identifiers

PMID22843306
OpenAlexW2014372977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.