Trial reportEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2019
A comparative study of two infusion doses of etomidate for induction vs standard induction dose of etomidate.
Trial report in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the search for the ideal intravenous induction drug, etomidate is in the forefront as it provides haemodynamic stability without compromising on the end point of induction. It has been established that slowing the rate of infusion of propofol decreases the dose required for induction. Even though etomidate provides good haemodynamic stability while inducing, there is concern about its cortisol suppressive function. This study has been designed, with entropy guidance, to establish whether induction by slowing the rate of infusion of etomidate will reduce the dose required for induction and simultaneously assess whether adverse effects are reduced.
methodsNinety-six patients were randomly allocated into three groups based on etomidate dose. Etomidate dose was given till both loss of eyelash reflex and entropy50 was achieved. Total dose of etomidate consumed, time taken for loss of eye lash reflex and time to reach entropy50 were recorded. Cortisol levels were measured at different intervals.
resultsWe observed that slowing the rate of infusion reduced the dose of etomidate for induction; however, it prolonged the time for induction of anaesthesia. Cortisol levels were suppressed in the first 6 h after induction in all three groups, but remained within normal limits and reached to pre induction levels by 24 h.
conclusionThe slower the rate of infusion, the lesser the dose of etomidate used for induction, but prolongs the time taken to reach the end point of induction. Incidence of myoclonus might be avoided by infusing etomidate for induction at a lower rate. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY URL: Clinical Trials Registry of India, CTRI/2016/04/006879, www.ctri.nic.in/.
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.