ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2017
Sevoflurane may be more beneficial than propofol in patients receiving endoscopic variceal ligation and endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy: A randomized, double-blind study.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the Jcerity endoscoper airway and the endotracheal tube in endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam Tosilate versus Propofol for General Anesthesia in Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Variceal Ligation.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Sevoflurane alleviates myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury via actitation of heat shock protein-70 in patients undergoing double valve replacement surgery.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
- Efficacy of Zhuyu Pill Intervention in a Cholestasis Rat Model: Mutual Effects on Fecal Metabolism and Microbial Diversity.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Dexmedetomidine suppresses sevoflurane anesthesia-induced neuroinflammation through activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway.BMC anesthesiology · 2019Article
- Anesthetic effect of propofol combined with remifentanil or sevoflurane anesthesia on patients undergoing radical gastrectomy.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Sevoflurane anesthesia alters cognitive function by activating inflammation and cell death in rats.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of various general anesthesia regimens during endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) and endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS). A total of 123 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status III and IV, aged 40-70 years, undergoing general anesthesia for EVL and EVS were randomly divided into two groups: Sevoflurane anesthesia (group S; n=60) and propofol anesthesia (group P; n=60). Vital signs, particularly heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP), were monitored. The designated time points were as follows: 5 min before induction (T0), and 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 min after intubation (T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6 and T7, respectively). Time intervals were recorded, including recovery time and extubation time. Following surgery, the observer recorded the Ramsay sedation scale (RSS) score and the visual analogue scale (VAS) score. Adverse reactions were noted. Results demonstrated that there were significant differences in MAP between the two groups at T2, T3, T5, T6 and T7 (P<0.05). There was a significant difference in HR between the two groups at T2, T3 and T4 (P<0.05). Recovery time and extubation time in group P were significantly longer than those in group S (P<0.05; 18.38±2.25 min vs. 14.57±1.04 min and 21.70±2.70 min vs. 15.83±0.88 min, respectively). The rate of ephedrine injected was 58.3% (35/60 patients) in group P vs. 28.3% (17/60 patients) in group S (P<0.05). There was a significant difference in the RSS score between the two groups 5 min after extubation (P<0.05). VRS scores demonstrated that anesthetists and patients were significantly more satisfied with the procedure in group S than in group P (P<0.01). In conclusion, the superiority and special clinical value of inhalational anesthesia has been demonstrated during EVL and EVS attributed to stable hemodynamics and high quality of anesthesia recovery in the present study.
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.