ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2020
Efficacy of procaine combined with ketamine and propofol in pediatric epidural anesthesia.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, the effect of procaine combined with ketamine and propofol in pediatric epidural anesthesia was analyzed. A total of 74 children scheduled to undergo surgery under epidural anesthesia were included in the study, and were divided into two groups using a random number table. Accordingly, 37 patients received epidural anesthesia using ketamine and propofol (control group), whereas the remaining patients received procaine combined with ketamine and propofol (observation group). The vital signs, sedative effects, anesthetic effects, pain intensity, anesthetic dose and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the groups. It was revealed that the heart rate and mean arterial pressure at T4 (following epidural administration) in the observation group was significantly lower compared with those of the control group (P<0.05). However, no statistical difference was observed in the proportion of patients with sedation at Ramsay levels 1-6 between the observation and the control group (P>0.05). Compared with the control group, the observation group reported a shorter latent period for the onset of the anesthetic effect and the disappearance of pain, and a longer period for the recovery of pain sensation (P<0.05). The observation group exhibited prominently lower visual analog scale scores at 6, 12, 18 and 24 h post-surgery compared with the control group (P<0.05). Additionally, the observation group received a lower dose of ketamine and propofol compared with the control group (P<0.05). An incidence of adverse reactions of 8.11% was noted in the observation group during the surgery and anesthesia recovery period, which was lower compared with that of the control group (29.73%) (P<0.05). The results of the present study indicated that the combination of procaine with ketamine and propofol in pediatric epidural anesthesia may be more commonly employed, considering its advantages in accelerating the anesthesia process, improving the anesthetic effects and guaranteeing anesthesia safety. However, only a few indicators of the anesthesia efficacy and a small group of patients were included in the present study, and a long-term comprehensive analysis using a larger sample size is required to address this issue.
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.