Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25225518›Full record

ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2014

Clinical comparison of propofol-remifentanil TCI with sevoflurane induction/maintenance anesthesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Xiaoqian Deng, Tao Zhu

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 82% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Precise anesthesia in thoracoscopic operations.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2019
    Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiaoqian DengXiaoqian Deng, MD, Resident, Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Tao ZhuTao Zhu, MD, Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledObjective : We aimed to compare the anesthetic characteristics between total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) using propofol-remifentanil with target control infusion (TCI) and volatile induction and maintenance anesthesia (VIMA) using sevoflurane and sufentanyl for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

methodsA total of 120 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to two groups. Patients in group T received TCI of propofol-remifentanil for induction and maintenance. Patients in group S received sevoflurane-sufentanyl for induction and maintenance.

resultsPatients in group S had a significantly faster induction time than patients in group T (109s vs.44s). The emergence time in terms of time to extubation was comparable between the two groups, while the time to eyes opening (419s vs.483s, p=0.006) and duration in PACU were longer in group S (44 min vs.53 min, p=0.017). Ten (17.2%) patients in group S were administered an antihypertensive drug when gallbladder issues were present, while only 1(1.7%) patient needed this drug in group T (p=0.004).More patients in group T than in group S received fentanyl for analgesia in PACU (88%vs.70%, p=0.013). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in PACU was higher in group S than in group T (20% vs.38%, p=0.027).

conclusionBoth techniques had advantages and disadvantages in laparoscopic cholecystectomy; none of the techniques studied was superior.

Indexed as

Propofol-remifentanilSevofluraneTCITIVAVIMA

Identifiers

PMID25225518
PMCPMC4163224
OpenAlexW2324651301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.