ArticleDer Anaesthesist2018
[Drugs for intravenous induction of anesthesia: ketamine, midazolam and synopsis of current hypnotics].
Article in Der Anaesthesist, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Midazolam impacts acetyl-And butyrylcholinesterase genes: An epigenetic explanation for postoperative delirium?PloS one · 2022Article
- [67-year-old male in resuscitation room for treatment after traffic accident : Preparation for the medical specialist examination: Part 7].Der Anaesthesist · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ketamine and midazolam form the endpoint of a series of articles about intravenous induction of anesthesia . Both substances can be used as single induction hypnotic drugs; however, in practice, this is unusual. Both substances, with the exception of a few very specific indications and clinical situations, are more frequently used in combination or with one of the more common alternatives propofol, barbiturates and etomidate. The reasons are the activity and side effects of both substances and their positive characteristics are used more as a supplement. In the concluding comparison the five discussed induction hypnotics are judged against each other. The use in certain clinical constellations and in special patient populations is evaluated individually for each substance. It is highlighted which drug appears most appropriate in which situation. As methohexital is nowadays only administered in very few clinical situations, this substance is not included in the comparative assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30069734What 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.