Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27005294›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2016

Etomidate plus propofol versus propofol alone for sedation during gastroscopy: a randomized prospective clinical trial.

Xiang Zhou, Bi-Xi Li, Li-Min Chen, Jun Tao, Sui Zhang, Meng Ji, Ming-Chun Wu, Min Chen, Yan-Hui Zhang, Guo-Shen Gan and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Etomidate Sedation for Advanced Endoscopic Procedures.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2019
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiang ZhouDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Bi-Xi LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China. whzyylbx@126.com.
Li-Min ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Jun TaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Sui ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Meng JiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Ming-Chun WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Min ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Yan-Hui ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Guo-Shen GanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China.
Xiao-Yang SongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Command, Wuhan, 430070, Hubei, People's Republic of China. whzyysxy@126.com.
Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsSedation with propofol alone during gastroscopy has many side effects. Etomidate has advantages in terms of circulation and respiration compared to propofol. We hypothesized that etomidate plus propofol during gastroscopy would be more safe and effective than propofol alone.

methodsFour hundred (n = 400) patients were randomly divided into a propofol group (P group) and a etomidate plus propofol group (EP group). The P group was given the first dose of 1 % propofol 1 mg/kg before gastroscopy, and the EP group was given 1 % propofol 0.5 mg/kg plus etomidate 0.1 mg/kg. Repeated doses of 10-20 mg propofol or 5-10 mg propofol plus 1-2 mg etomidate were administered to maintain an adequate level of sedation. The sedation depth was maintained by bispectral index value of 40-60.

resultsThe EP group had a lower incidence of systolic hypotension (13.0 vs. 32.5 %; P < 0.0001), bradycardia (8.5 vs. 16.5 %; P = 0.0226), mild hypoxemia (6.5 vs. 18.0 %; P = 0.0007), and severe hypoxemia (2.5 vs. 10.0 %; P = 0.0031) compared to the P group. Also, the satisfaction of anesthetist and gastroscopist with EP was higher than that of P group (P < 0.0001; P = 0.018, respectively).

conclusionEtomidate plus propofol had few effects on respiration and circulation in patients undergoing gastroscopy and was more safe and effective than propofol alone.

Indexed as

GastroscopyAdultAnesthetics, IntravenousAttitude of Health PersonnelBradycardiaDrug Therapy, CombinationEtomidateFemaleHumansHypotensionHypoxiaMaleMiddle AgedPropofolProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodAnesthetics, IntravenousEtomidatePropofolEtomidateGastroscopyPropofolSedationSide effects

Identifiers

PMID27005294
OpenAlexW2306701073

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.