Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25422614›Full record

ReviewSaudi journal of anaesthesia2014

Propofol alternatives in gastrointestinal endoscopy anesthesia.

Basavana Gouda Goudra, Preet Mohinder Singh

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Saudi journal of anaesthesia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03196479 (Comparison Between Efficacy of Ketamine and Propofol Mixture With 1), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

NCT03196479 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

Comparison Between Efficacy of Ketamine and Propofol Mixture With 1:6 Ratio and 1:4 Ratio for Endoscopic Retrograde Procedure Sedation

TypeinterventionalSponsorIndonesia UniversityRan2017 to 2017Enrolled58ConditionsAdult Patients Undergoing ERCPArmsketamine and propofol mixture with 1:6 ratio, ketamine and propofol mixture with 1:4 ratio
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. A comprehensive review of remimazolam for sedation.Health psychology research · 2021
    Review
  9. Recent Developments in Drugs for GI Endoscopy Sedation.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2020
    Review
  10. Big Sleep: Beyond Propofol Sedation During GI Endoscopy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019
    Article
  11. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Basavana Gouda GoudraDepartment of Clinical Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, 680 Dulles Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Preet Mohinder SinghDepartment of Anesthesia, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · INUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although propofol has been the backbone for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy, both anesthesiologists and endoscopists are faced with situations where an alternative is needed. Recent national shortages forced many physicians to explore these options. A midazolam and fentanyl combination is the mainstay in this area. However, there are other options. The aim of this review is to explore these options. The future would be, invariably, to move away from propofol. The reason is not in any way related to the drawbacks of propofol as a sedative. The mandate that requires an anesthesia provider to administer propofol has been a setback in many countries. New sedative drugs like Remimazolam might fill this void in the future. In the meantime, it is important to keep an open eye to the existing alternatives.

Indexed as

GI endoscopy sedationnon-anesthetist administered propofolpropofol complications in sedationpropofol Remimazolam

Identifiers

PMID25422614
PMCPMC4236943
OpenAlexW1969800043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.