Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25085686›Full record

Trial reportIrish journal of medical science2015

Remifentanil requirements for preventing motor response to skin incision in healthy women anesthetized with combinations of propofol and dexmedetomidine titrated to similar Bispectral Index (BIS) values.

X Wu, L-H Hang, Y-F Chen, H Wang, D-H Shao, Z Chen

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Irish journal of medical science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

X WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated Hospital of School of Medicine of Ningbo University, Ningbo, Zhejiang, China.
L-H HangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China.
Y-F ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China.
H WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China.
D-H ShaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China.
Z ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China. czczgljglj@163.com.
Jiangsu University · CNNingbo University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unclear whether the sedative, analgesic or sympatholytic effects of adjunctive dexmedetomidine contribute to reduced analgesic requirements in general anesthesia. This study aimed to assess the analgesic effect of dexmedetomidine on intraoperative opioid requirements using body movement as observation indicator at similar BIS-guided sedative depth in propofol anesthesia.

methodsNinety patients were randomly divided into three groups to receive administration of saline, and dexmedetomidine at 0.5 and 1.0 µg kg(-1) over 10 min, followed by saline and dexmedetomidine at infusion rates of 0.17 and 0.33 µg kg(-1) h(-1), respectively. After dexmedetomidine and saline bolus administration, propofol was titrated to maintain the BIS values at 45-55. When BIS values reached the predetermined range, remifentanil was administered by target-controlled infusion. Five minutes following remifentanil treatment, skin was incised and the motor response observed. Then, the concentration of remifentanil blunting the motor response in 50% of patients (Ce50) was determined using a modified Dixon's sequential 'up-and-down' method.

resultsDexmedetomidine significantly decreased effect-site concentrations of propofol for maintaining the preset BIS range (P < 0.01). The Ce50 (95% CI) of remifentanil were 0.93 (0.82-1.03), 1.03 (0.89-1.17) and 0.91 (0.77-1.06) ng ml(-1) in the 0 (saline), 0.5 and 1.0 µg kg(-1) dexmedetomidine groups, respectively, indicating non-statistically significant differences among groups (P > 0.0167).

conclusionsPropofol and its combination with dexmedetomidine have similar opioid requirements for preventing motor response to skin incision when titrated to similar BIS values. These findings indicate that adjunctive dexmedetomidine for general anesthesia has sedative but no opioid sparing effects.

Indexed as

AdultAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthetics, IntravenousDexmedetomidineElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesMiddle AgedPiperidinesPropofolRemifentanilSkinYoung AdultAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, IntravenousDexmedetomidineHypnotics and SedativesPiperidinesPropofolRemifentanilBispectral indexDexmedetomidineMotor responsePropofolRemifentanil

Identifiers

PMID25085686
OpenAlexW2044571614

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.