Trial reportSaudi medical journal2015
Sedation in hypoalbuminemic geriatric patients under spinal anesthesia in hip surgery. Midazolam or Propofol?
Trial report in Saudi medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of dexmedetomidine infusion during spinal anesthesia on hemodynamics and sedation.The Libyan journal of medicine · 2018Trial
- Predictors and nomogram of midazolam-induced somnolence: a retrospective cohort study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Anesthetic management of geriatric patients.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare midazolam and propofol sedation in hypoalbuminemic geriatric patients under spinal anesthesia in hip surgery with bispectral index monitoring.
methodsThis prospective and randomized study was completed in the Department of Anesthesiology, Okmeydani Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey between February 2013 and December 2014. Sixty patients undergoing elective hip surgery under spinal anesthesia in the geriatric age group with albumin levels below 3 g/dl were randomly divided into Group I and Group II. After administration of spinal block, Group I were given 0.05 mg/kg bolus midazolam, and then 0.02-0.1 mg/kg/hr dose infusion was begun. In Group II, 1 mg/kg bolus propofol was given within 10 minutes, and then 1-3 mg/kg/hr infusion was begun. The systolic arterial pressure, diastolic arterial pressure, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, peripheral oxygen saturation values, respiratory rate, and Wilson's 5-stage sedation score were recorded at 15-minute intervals. At the end of the operation, the recovery time and surgeon satisfaction were recorded.
resultsThe recovery times for patients in Group I were found to be longer than in Group II (p less than 0.05). The respiration rate in patients in Group I at the start of surgery, 15th minute of surgery, and after surgery were lower than in Group II (p less than 0.05).
conclusionWe conclude that propofol is more reliable in terms of hemodynamic stability than midazolam, as it causes less respiratory depression and faster recovery in the propofol group.
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.