ArticleThe Journal of veterinary medical science2018
Comparison of plasma propofol concentration for apnea, response to mechanical ventilation, and airway device between endotracheal tube and supraglottic airway device in Beagles.
Article in The Journal of veterinary medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determination of Minimum Alveolar Concentrations of Isoflurane and Effective Plasma Concentration of Propofol in Common Marmosets (Callithrix jacchus).Journal of medical primatology · 2025Article
- Retrospective comparison of the effects of laryngeal mask and endotracheal tube on some cardio-respiratory variables in pet rabbits undergoing anaesthesia for elective gonadectomy.Acta veterinaria Scandinavica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The relationships between propofol plasma concentrations and the pharmacodynamic endpoints may differ according to a type of airway device. To clarify these relationships in different airway devices would be useful to avoid the complication such as apnea and intraoperative awareness. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of difference of airway device on propofol requirement during maintenance of anesthesia in dogs. We compared the influence of airway devices on the plasma propofol concentrations for apnea, response to mechanical ventilation, and response to airway device between endotracheal tube (ETT) and supraglottic airway device (SGAD) in Beagles. The pharmacodynamic effects were repeatedly assessed at varying propofol concentrations. The plasma concentrations (mean ± SD) of propofol in the ETT and SGAD groups were 10.2 ± 1.8 and 10.9 ± 2.4 µg/ml for apnea (P=0.438), 7.9 ± 1.2 and 7.4 ± 1.5 µg/ml for response to mechanical ventilation (P=0.268), and 5.2 ± 0.7 and 5.4 ± 1.5 µg/ml for response to airway device (P=0.580), respectively. Required propofol concentration during maintenance of anesthesia may be similar between ETT and SGAD. Without moderate to strong stimuli such as airway device insertion or painful stimulation during surgery, the type of airway device may have little impact on required propofol concentration during maintenance of anesthesia in dogs.
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.