Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26364193›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2016

Propofol and non-propofol based sedation for outpatient colonoscopy-prospective comparison of depth of sedation using an EEG based SEDLine monitor.

Basavana Goudra, Preet Mohinder Singh, Gowri Gouda, Anuradha Borle, Augustus Carlin, Avantika Yadwad

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. No increased risk of perforation during colonoscopy in patients undergoing propofol versus traditional sedation: A meta-analysis.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Anesthesia for Bronchoscopy-An Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Endo-anesthesia: a primer.Gastroenterology report · 2022
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Big Sleep: Beyond Propofol Sedation During GI Endoscopy.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Sedation in the Endoscopy Suite.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2016
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Basavana GoudraDepartment of Clinical Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, 680 Dulles Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. goudrab@uphs.upenn.edu.
Preet Mohinder SinghDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, All India Institutes of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar East, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Gowri GoudaPennoni Honors College, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Anuradha BorleDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, All India Institutes of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar East, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Augustus CarlinDepartment of Clinical Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, 680 Dulles Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Avantika YadwadDepartment of Clinical Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, 680 Dulles Building, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · INUniversity of Pennsylvania · USDrexel University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Propofol is a popular anesthetic sedative employed in colonoscopy. It is known to increase the patient satisfaction and improve throughput. However, there are concerns among the clinicians with regard to the depth of sedation, as a deeper degree of sedation is known to increase the incidence of aspiration and other adverse events. So we planned to compare the depth of sedation between propofol and non-propofol based sedation in patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy, as measured by an electroencephalogram (EEG) based monitor SEDLine monitor (SedlineInc., San Diego, CA). The non-randomized prospective observational study was performed in the outpatient gastroenterology suite of the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Patients included ASA class I-III aged more than 18 years scheduled for colonoscopy under Propofol or non-propofol based sedation. After an institutional review board approval, a written consent was obtained from prospective patients. Sedation (propofol or non-propofol based) was administered by either a certified nurse anesthetist under the supervision of an anesthesiologist (propofol) or a registered endoscopy nurse under the guidance of the endoscopist performing the procedure (non-propofol sedation). Depth of sedation was measured with an EEG based SEDLine monitor. The sedation providers were blinded to the patient state index-the indicator of depth of sedation. PSI (patient state index-SEDLine reading) was documented at colonoscope insertion, removal and at the return of verbal responsiveness after colonoscope withdrawal. Sedation spectrum was retrieved from the data stored on the SEDLine monitor. Patients sedated with propofol experience significantly deeper degrees of sedation at all times during the procedure. Additionally, during significant part of the procedure, they are at PSI levels associated with deep general anesthesia. The group that received propofol was more deeply sedated and had lower PSI values. Lighter propofol titration protocols may lead to improved patient care such as lowering risk of aspiration and hypotension. The role of processed EEG monitors such as the SEDLine monitor to improve sedation protocols remains to be determined. Trial registration We obtained an ethical clearance from the Institute. No trial registration was mandated, as no interventional drug or investigational device were used during the study.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnesthesia, GeneralAnestheticsColonoscopyElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicOutpatientsPatient SatisfactionProcedural SedationPropofolAnestheticsHypnotics and SedativesPropofolColonoscopyDepth of sedationElectroencephalogramNon-propofol sedationPatient state indexPropofol sedationSEDLine monitor

Identifiers

PMID26364193
OpenAlexW1728394583

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.