Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25954683›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2015

Comparative evaluation of dexmedetomidine and esmolol on hemodynamic responses during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Vinit K Srivastava, Vaishali Nagle, Sanjay Agrawal, Diwakar Kumar, Amit Verma, Sunil Kedia

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vinit K SrivastavaConsultant Anaesthesiologist, Department of Anaesthesiology, Apollo Hospitals Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India .
Vaishali NaglePostgraduate Trainee, Department of Anaesthesiology, Apollo Hospitals Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India .
Sanjay AgrawalProfessor, Department of Anesthesiology, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences , Dehradun, India .
Diwakar KumarSenior Consultant, Department of Anaesthesiology, Apollo Hospitals Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India .
Amit VermaSenior Consultant, Department of Surgery, Apollo Hospitals Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India .
Sunil KediaSenior Consultant, Department of Surgery, Apollo Hospitals Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India .
Apollo Hospitals · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe advent of laparoscopic surgery has benefited the patient and surgeon; however creation of pneumoperitoneum for same has bearings during the perioperative period. These effects of pneumoperitoneum are associated with significant haemodynamic changes, increasing the morbidity of the patient.

aimThe present study compared the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and esmolol on hemodynamic responses during laparoscopic cholecystectomy Materials and Methods: A total of 90 patients aged 20-60 y, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II, of either sex, planned for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. The patients were randomly divided into three groups of 30 each. Group D received dexmedetomidine loading dose 1 mcg/kg over a period of 15 min and maintenance 0.5 mcg/kg/h throughout the pneumoperitoneum. Group E received esmolol loading dose 1 mg/kg over a period of 5 min and maintenance 0.5 mg/kg/h throughout the pneumoperitoneum. Group C received same volume of normal saline. MEASUREMENTS: Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded preoperative, after study drug, after induction, after intubation, after pneumoperitoneum at 15 min intervals, post pneumoperitoneum and postoperative period after 15 min. Propofol induction dose, intraoperative fentanyl requirement and sedation score were also recorded.

resultsIn group D, there was no statistically significant increase in HR and blood pressure after pneumoperitoneum at any time intervals, whereas in Group E, there was a statistical significant increase in MAP after pneumoperitoneum at 15, 45, and 60 min only and HR during the whole pneumoperitoneum period. There was a significant decrease in induction dose of propofol and intraoperative fentanyl requirement in Group D and E, compared to Group C (p<0.0001).

conclusionDexmedetomidine is more effective than esmolol for attenuating the hemodynamic response to pneumoperitoneum in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Dexmedetomidine and esmolol also reduced requirements of anaesthetic agents.

Indexed as

General anesthesiaPneumoperitoneumα2 agonist

Identifiers

PMID25954683
PMCPMC4413133
OpenAlexW2117602694

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.