ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2016
Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for sedation during endoscopy: A meta-analysis.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06756594 (Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine-Propofol Versus Ketamine-Propofol for Sedation During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine-Propofol Versus Ketamine-Propofol for Sedation During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ciprofol versus propofol for painless gastrointestinal endoscopy: a dose-stratified systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- The safety and efficacy of remimazolam, ciprofol, and propofol anesthesia in endoscopy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled 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
- Comparison of the Effect of Adding Low-dose Ketamine to Dexmedetomidine and Propofol on the Quality of Sedation and Hemodynamic Response in Children During Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2023Article
- New sedatives and analgesic drugs for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Review
- Comparison between the Effects of Acetaminophen, Dexmedetomidine, and Normal Saline Infusion on Pain Severity after Cataract Surgery.Advanced biomedical research · 2022Article
- Comparison of the Sedation Quality of Etomidate, Propofol, and Midazolam in Combination with Fentanyl During Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled, Clinical Trial.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2019Article
- Effect of dexmedetomidine in the prophylactic endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for oesophageal varices: a study protocol for prospective interventional study.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2017Article
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients undergoing endoscopy frequently require sedation, which commonly includes the administration of midazolam or dexmedetomidine. Previous meta-analyses have mainly focused on comparing the effects of these two drugs in intensive care unit patients. In the present study, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the sedative and clinical effectiveness of these two drugs in patients undergoing endoscopy were searched in a number of databases. The meta-analysis showed that dexmedetomidine demonstrated a significantly lower rate of respiratory depression and adverse events compared with those presented upon midazolam administration. A significant difference was also observed in the sedation potency of the sedatives. The current controlled data suggest that dexmedetomidine may be an alternative to midazolam in the sedation for endoscopy. However, more high-quality and well-designed studies are required to further evaluate this conclusion.
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.