Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31096522›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2019

Safety and efficacy of combined use of propofol and etomidate for sedation during gastroscopy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lingyuan Chen, Xueyan Liang, Xinmei Tan, Haibin Wen, Junsong Jiang, Yan Li

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05358535 (Propofol and Etomidate Admixtures Comparisons Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05358535 phase3recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Propofol and Etomidate Admixtures Comparisons Trial (PEAC Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterRan2022 to 2027Enrolled200ConditionsAnesthesia, Propofol Adverse Reaction, Etomidate Adverse Reaction, Anesthesia ComplicationArmsAdmixture of propofol and etomidate at a ratio by volume of 75%/25% (P7E2), Admixture of propofol and etomidate at a ratio by volume of 25%/75% (P2E7)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pharmaceutical biology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. The Pharmacology of Physiologically Difficult Airway Management and Impact on Hemodynamics: A Review.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lingyuan ChenDepartment of Pharmacy.
Xueyan LiangDepartment of Pharmacy.
Xinmei TanDepartment of anesthesiology.
Haibin WenDepartment of Nephrology.
Junsong JiangDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, The People's Hospital of Hechi, Hechi, PR China.
Yan LiDepartment of Pharmacy.
Hechi University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSedation with etomidate or propofol alone during gastroscopy has many side effects. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the combined use of propofol and etomidate for sedation during gastroscopy.

methodsPubMed, Embase, Medline (via Ovid SP), Cochrane library databases, CINAHL (via EBSCO), China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc), Wanfang, VIP, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were systematically searched. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the combined use of propofol and etomidate vs etomidate or propofol alone for sedation during gastroscopy. Data were pooled using the random-effects models or fixed-effect model based on heterogeneity.

resultsFifteen studies with 2973 participants were included in the analysis. Compared to propofol alone, the combined use of propofol and etomidate possibly increased recovery time (SMD = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.04-0.24; P = .005), and the risk for myoclonus (OR = 3.07, 95% CI = 1.73-5.44; P < .001), injection pain, and nausea and vomiting. Furthermore, compared to propofol alone, the combination of propofol and etomidate produced an apparent beneficial effect for mean arterial pressure (MAP) after anesthesia (SMD = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.38-2.26; P = .006), SPO2 after anesthesia (SMD = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.43-1.55; P < .001), apnea or hypoxemia (OR = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.08-0.33; P < .001), injection pain, and body movement. Further, compared to etomidate alone, the combination of propofol and etomidate reduced the risk for myoclonus (OR = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.11-0.22; P < .001), body movement, and nausea and vomiting.

conclusionThe combination of propofol and etomidate might increase recovery time vs that associated with propofol, but it had fewer side effects on circulation and respiration in patients undergoing gastroscopy. The combined use of propofol and etomidate can improve and produce an apparent beneficial effect on the adverse effects of propofol or etomidate alone, and it was safer and more effective than propofol or etomidate alone.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, CombinedAnesthetics, IntravenousArterial PressureChinaEtomidateFemaleGastroscopyHumansHypoxiaInjection Site ReactionMaleMyoclonusNauseaPropofolRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRiskAnesthetics, CombinedAnesthetics, IntravenousEtomidatePropofol

Identifiers

PMID31096522
PMCPMC6531275
OpenAlexW2945623480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.