Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2015
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sedation between dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03775876 (Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol in Conjunction With Regional Block for Shoulder Arthroscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol in Conjunction With Regional Block for Shoulder Arthroscopy: a Randomized Controlled Double Blind Trial
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of sedation with dexmedetomidine in adults undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparing outcomes for endoscopic submucosal dissection between Eastern and Western countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2018Pooled it
- Dexmedetomidine versus propofol during drug-induced sleep endoscopy and sedation: a systematic review.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2017Pooled it
- A prospective, randomized, single-blinded study comparing the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Trial
- Addition of Dexmedetomidine to the Anesthesia Regimen Attenuates Pain and Improves Early Recovery After Esophageal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2024Trial
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sedation protocols with the use of dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil during percutaneous closure of atrial septal defects: a randomized clinical trial.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Trial
- Comparison Effects of Propofol-Dexmedetomidine versus Propofol-Remifentanil for Endoscopic Ultrasonography: A Prospective Randomized Comparative Trial.BioMed research international · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Dexmedetomidine for conscious sedation with colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a prospective double-blind randomized controlled study.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2018Trial
- Efficacy of a Dexmedetomidine-Remifentanil Combination Compared with a Midazolam-Remifentanil Combination for Conscious Sedation During Therapeutic Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreatography: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blinded Preliminary Trial.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Trial
- Efficacy, safety, and impact on procedural outcomes of local anesthesia in endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2024Review
- Conscious Sedation Methods for Blepharoplasty in Day Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Advances in Analgosedation and Periprocedural Care for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Safety and efficacy of pentazocine-midazolam combination for pain and anxiety relief in radiofrequency ablation therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2022Article
- Pre-procedural Preparation and Sedation for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in Patients with Advanced Liver Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
- Effect of Intraoperative Magnesium Sulfate Administration on Blood Glucose Control following Total Joint Arthroplasty in Patients with Diabetes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Endo-anesthesia: a primer.Gastroenterology report · 2022Review
- Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Dexmedetomidine Administered in Two Different Modes Under Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in Plastic Surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Comparison of Respiratory Effects between Dexmedetomidine and Propofol Sedation for Ultrasound-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatic Neoplasm: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- The Effects of Propofol or Dexmedetomidine Sedation on Postoperative Recovery in Elderly Patients Receiving Lower Limb Surgery under Spinal Anesthesia: A Retrospective Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the efficacy and safety of sedation protocols for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) between dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol-remifentanil.
methodsFifty-nine patients scheduled for ESD were randomly allocated into a dexmedetomidine-remifentanil (DR) group or a propofol-remifentanil (PR) group. To control patient anxiety, dexmedetomidine or propofol was infused to maintain a score of 4-5 on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale. Remifentanil was infused continuously at a rate of 6 μg/kg per hour in both groups. The ease of advancing the scope into the throat, gastric motility grading, and satisfaction of the endoscopist and patient were assessed. Hemodynamic variables and hypoxemic events were compared to evaluate patient safety.
resultsDemographic data were comparable between the groups. The hemodynamic variables and pulse oximetry values were stable during the procedure in both groups despite a lower heart rate in the DR group. No oxygen desaturation events occurred in either group. Although advancing the scope into the throat was easier in the PR group ("very easy" 24.1% vs 56.7%, P = 0.010), gastric motility was more suppressed in the DR group ("no + mild" 96.6% vs 73.3%, P = 0.013). The endoscopists felt that the procedure was more favorable in the DR group ("very good + good" 100% vs 86.7%, P = 0.042), whereas patient satisfaction scores were comparable between the groups. En bloc resection was performed 100% of the time in both groups, and the complete resection rate was 94.4% in the DR group and 100% in the PR group (P = 0.477).
conclusionThe efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil were comparable to propofol and remifentanil during ESD. However, the endoscopists favored dexmedetomidine perhaps due to lower gastric motility.
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.