ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019
Anesthetic Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine versus Midazolam When Combined with Remifentanil for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy of intramuscular ephedrine in preventing hemodynamic perturbations in patients with spinal anesthesia and dexmedetomidine sedation.International journal of medical sciences · 2020Trial
- Nalbuphine versus dexmedetomidine for treatment of combined spinal-epidural post-anesthetic shivering in pregnant women undergoing cesarean section.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Trial
- Dexmedetomidine alleviates postoperative cognitive dysfunction through circular RNA in aged rats.3 Biotech · 2020Article
- Monitored Anesthesia Care for Cardiovascular Interventions.Korean circulation journal · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anesthesia for percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) involves a high-risk population having a broad spectrum of pain character and intensity. This study delved the anesthetic efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam, when used with remifentanil. Seventy patients scheduled for femoropopliteal PTA were randomized into two groups receiving either intermittent midazolam boluses (0.03⁻0.05 mg/kg) (MR group) or dexmedetomidine 0.2⁻0.7 μg/kg/h after a loading dose of 1.0 μg/kg for 10 min (DR group), both with remifentanil. The primary endpoint was the patients' satisfaction (1⁻5, 5; extremely satisfied). Secondary endpoints included postprocedural pain scores (0⁻10, 10; worst imaginable pain) and adverse events. The satisfaction level of patients was significantly greater in the DR group compared with the MR group (4.0 [3.0, 5.0] versus 4.0 [2.0, 5.0]
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.