Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25015112›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2014

Comparison of clinical outcome variables in patients with and without etomidate-facilitated anesthesia induction ahead of major cardiac surgery: a retrospective analysis.

Sebastian Heinrich, Joachim Schmidt, Andreas Ackermann, Andreas Moritz, Frank Harig, Ixchel Castellanos

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06068764 (Etomidate Versus Propofol As An Anesthesia Induction Agent For Patients Undergoing CABG Surgery, Assessing Hemodynamic Stability. A Single Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

NCT06068764 phase4recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Etomidate Versus Propofol As An Anesthesia Induction Agent For Patients Undergoing CABG Surgery, Assessing Hemodynamic Stability. A Single Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorHartford HospitalRan2023 to 2026Enrolled300ConditionsCoronary Artery DiseaseArmsEtomidate, Propofol
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sebastian Heinrich
Joachim Schmidt
Andreas Ackermann
Andreas Moritz
Frank Harig
Ixchel Castellanos
Universitätsklinikum Erlangen · DEFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIt is well known that etomidate may cause adrenal insufficiency. However, the clinical relevance of adrenal suppression after a single dose of etomidate remains vague. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the administration of a single dose of etomidate or an alternative induction regime ahead of major cardiac surgery and clinical outcome parameters associated with adrenal suppression and onset of sepsis.

methodsThe anesthesia and intensive care unit (ICU) records from patients undergoing cardiac surgery over five consecutive years (2008 to 2012) were retrospectively analyzed. The focus of the analysis was on clinical parameters like mortality, ventilation hours, renal failure, and sepsis-linked serum parameters. Multivariate analysis and Cox regression were applied to derive the results.

resultsIn total, 3,054 patient records were analyzed. A group of 1,775 (58%) patients received a single dose of etomidate; 1,279 (42%) patients did not receive etomidate at any time. There was no difference in distribution of age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical score, duration of surgery, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score. Postoperative data showed no significant differences between the two groups in regard to mortality (6.8% versus 6.4%), mean of mechanical ventilation hours (21.2 versus 19.7), days in the ICU (2.6 versus 2.5), hospital days (18.7 versus 17.4), sepsis-associated parameters, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, and incidence of renal failure. Administration of etomidate showed no significant influence (P = 0.6) on hospital mortality in the multivariate Cox analysis.

conclusionsThis study found no evidence for differences in key clinical outcome parameters based on anesthesia induction with or without administration of a single dose of etomidate. In consequence, etomidate might remain an acceptable option for single-dose anesthesia induction.

Indexed as

AgedAnesthetics, IntravenousCardiac Surgical ProceduresEtomidateFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPreoperative CareRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnesthetics, IntravenousEtomidate

Identifiers

PMID25015112
PMCPMC4227004
OpenAlexW2137788035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.