ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2020
Comparative evaluation of oral melatonin and oral clonidine for the attenuation of haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation-A prospective randomised double blind study.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of melatonin in attenuation of hemodynamic response to intubation and anesthetic requirements: a randomized, controlled, double-blind study.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Trial
- Comparison of hypotensive properties of dexmedetomidine versus clonidine for induced hypotension during functional endoscopic sinus surgery: A randomised, double-blind interventional study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
- Effects of oral melatonin premedication on hemodynamic responses to intubation, anesthetic requirements and postoperative sedation: A randomized trial.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
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
BACKGROUND AND
aimsLaryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation cause significant derangement of the haemodynamic parameters proving detrimental for some patients. Clonidine, an α-2 adrenoreceptor agonist, and melatonin, the pineal hormone, have been used for the attenuation of these haemodynamic responses. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of oral melatonin and clonidine in attenuating the haemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective randomised double-blind study, 60 American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade I and II patients aged 20-60 years of either gender scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomly divided into Group M and Group C and orally received 6 mg of melatonin and 0.2 mg of clonidine, respectively, 120 min before the induction of anaesthesia. The haemodynamic parameters-heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure and rate -pressure product(RPP) were recorded before and 120 min after the administration of the study drug, before induction, immediately after intubation and at 1, 3, 5 and 10 min following intubation. Sedation was assessed using the Ramsay Sedation Scale. The qualitative and quantitative variables were analysed using Chi square test and unpaired student t test, respectively. For intragroup comparison of quantitative data, paired t test was applied. A
resultsA significant difference was noted between the groups regarding HR and RPP 0, 1, 3 and 5 min after intubation. The Ramsay sedation score ranged between 2 and 3 at all time intervals.
conclusionAlthough both the drugs are effective, oral melatonin proved superior to oral clonidine in attenuating the haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation without any side effects.
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.