ArticleClinical endoscopy2020
Efficacy and Safety of Etomidate in Comparison with Propofol or Midazolam as Sedative for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Ciprofol-Nalbuphine and Propofol-Nalbuphine Sedation During Painless Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Trial
- Ciprofol-etomidate versus propofol-etomidate for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Trial
- Risk factors for suspected infectious fever after diagnostic upper endoscopy: propofol overdose in a retrospective study from Korea.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Effects of Earmuffs and Eye Masks on Propofol Sedation during Spinal Anesthesia for Orthopedic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison of intravenous sedation with propofol, dexmedetomidine and midazolam in double-J ureteral stent removal.American journal of clinical and experimental urology · 2023Article
- New sedatives and analgesic drugs for gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Review
- Comparative Safety Profiles of Sedatives Commonly Used in Clinical Practice: A 10-Year Nationwide Pharmacovigilance Study in Korea.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsIn this study, we compared the efficacy and safety of etomidate with those of propofol or midazolam for the maintenance of sedation during endoscopy.
methodsThe study enrolled patients who underwent sedative endoscopy in our hospital and divided them into three groups. Patients in each group were administered midazolam as induction therapy and were subsequently administered either midazolam (M + M group), propofol (M + P group), or etomidate (M + E group) as maintenance medication. The primary outcome was overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events.
resultsIn total, 105 patients who underwent sedative endoscopic examination were enrolled. The outcomes related to the procedure and sedation were not significantly different among the groups. Overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events were observed in 9 patients (25.7%) in the M + M group, 8 patients (23.5%) in the M + P group, and 10 patients (27.8%) in the M + E group. The logistic regression analysis revealed that etomidate use was not an independent risk factor for overall cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events.
conclusionThe outcomes following the use of etomidate for maintenance after induction with midazolam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were not inferior to those following midazolam or propofol use from the perspectives of safety and efficacy.
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.