Trial reportOral and maxillofacial surgery2013
Analgesic efficacy and clinical acceptability of adjunct pre-emptive intravenous tramadol in midazolam sedation for third molar surgery.
Trial report in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of parenteral and local application of tramadol in mandibular third molar extraction: a qualitative systematic review of current evidence.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Safety of adjunct pre-emptive intravenous tramadol with midazolam sedation for third molar surgery.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2015Trial
- Intravenous S-ketamine's analgesic efficacy in third molar surgery. A randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial.British journal of pain · 2024Article
- Pre-emptive analgesic efficacy of injected ketorolac in comparison to other agents for third molar surgical removal: a systematic review.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aims to compare two routine procedures of sedation, with and without intravenous adjunct analgesia, in third molar surgery regarding postoperative pain and consumption of analgesics. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn a randomized, controlled, single-blinded procedure, 87 men and women aged 18-44 years were divided into two treatment groups, midazolam + tramadol (M + T) and midazolam + saline (M + S), and one control group (C), with no additional medication. After removal of a third lower molar, patients recorded postoperative pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) and consumption of analgesics during the first day after surgery.
resultsTime from the end of operation until first rescue pill (400 mg Ibuprofen tablet) differed significantly between the M + S group (193 min) and the C group (110 min) (p = 0.001) as well as the M + T group (157 min) and the C group (p = 0.049). The study did not show any significant reduction of postoperative pain, VAS, after third molar surgery in patients who received adjunct pre-emptive intravenous administration of 1 mg/kg tramadol under midazolam sedation. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThe lack of significant difference between the study and placebo groups indicates that tramadol at 1 mg/kg might be an insufficient dose, though the suitability for tramadol in oral and maxillofacial surgery has already been settled in other 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.