Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28322337›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2017

Sedation of mechanically ventilated adults in intensive care unit: a network meta-analysis.

Zhongheng Zhang, Kun Chen, Hongying Ni, Xiaoling Zhang, Haozhe Fan

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05758597 (Clinical Study on Sedative Effect and Safety of Remimazolam Besylate in ARDS Patients With Mechanical Ventilation), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT05758597 phase4unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Study on Sedative Effect and Safety of Remimazolam Besylate in ARDS Patients With Mechanical Ventilation

TypeinterventionalSponsorZhiming JiangRan2024 to 2025Enrolled100ConditionsRespiratory Distress SyndromeArmsRemazolam besylate, midazolam
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Combining OJournal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhongheng ZhangDepartment of emergency medicine, Sir Run-Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310016, China.
Kun ChenDepartment of critical care medicine, Jinhua municipal central hospital, Jinhua hospital of Zhejiang university, Zhejiang, P. R. China.
Hongying NiDepartment of critical care medicine, Jinhua municipal central hospital, Jinhua hospital of Zhejiang university, Zhejiang, P. R. China.
Xiaoling ZhangDepartment of critical care medicine, Jinhua municipal central hospital, Jinhua hospital of Zhejiang university, Zhejiang, P. R. China.
Haozhe FanDepartment of critical care medicine, Jinhua municipal central hospital, Jinhua hospital of Zhejiang university, Zhejiang, P. R. China.
Jinhua Central Hospital · CNSir Run Run Shaw Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sedatives are commonly used for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units (ICU). However, a variety of sedatives are available and their efficacy and safety have been compared in numerous trials with inconsistent results. To resolve uncertainties regarding usefulness of these sedatives, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials comparing sedatives in mechanically ventilated ICU patients were included. Graph-theoretical methods were employed for network meta-analysis. A total of 51 citations comprising 52 RCTs were included in our analysis. Dexmedetomidine showed shorter MV duration than lorazepam (mean difference (MD): 68.7; 95% CI: 18.2-119.3 hours), midazolam (MD: 10.2; 95% CI: 7.7-12.7 hours) and propofol (MD: 3.4; 95% CI: 0.9-5.9 hours). Compared with dexmedetomidine, midazolam was associated with significantly increased risk of delirium (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.17-5.19). Our study shows that dexmedetomidine has potential benefits in reducing duration of MV and lowering the risk of delirium.

Indexed as

Critical CareIntensive Care UnitsRespiration, ArtificialHumansHypnotics and SedativesOdds RatioOutcome Assessment, Health CarePublication BiasHypnotics and Sedatives

Identifiers

PMID28322337
PMCPMC5359583
OpenAlexW2600981364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.