Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33725225›Full record

ArticleAnnals of intensive care2021

Pain and dyspnea control during awake fiberoptic bronchoscopy in critically ill patients: safety and efficacy of remifentanil target-controlled infusion.

Margot Caron, Antoine Parrot, Alexandre Elabbadi, Sophie Dupeyrat, Matthieu Turpin, Thomas Baury, Sacha Rozencwajg, Clarisse Blayau, Jean-Pierre Fulgencio, Aude Gibelin and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of intensive care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Estimation of EDDrug design, development and therapy · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Target controlled infusion in the intensive care unit: a scoping review.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. ECDrug design, development and therapy · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

16 authors.

Margot CaronSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Antoine ParrotSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Alexandre ElabbadiSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Sophie DupeyratSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Matthieu TurpinSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Thomas BaurySorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Sacha RozencwajgSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Clarisse BlayauSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Jean-Pierre FulgencioSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Aude GibelinSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Pierre-Yves BlanchardSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Séverine RodriguezSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Daisy DaignéSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Marie-Cécile AllainSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Muriel FartoukhSorbonne Université, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de médecine intensive réanimation, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Tài PhamUniversité Paris-Saclay, AP-HP, Service de médecine intensive-réanimation, Hôpital de Bicêtre, DMU CORREVE, FHU SEPSIS, Groupe de recherche clinique CARMAS, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. tai.pham@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4373-0711

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFlexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy is frequently used in intensive care unit, but is a source of discomfort, dyspnea and anxiety for patients. Our objective was to assess the feasibility and tolerance of a sedation using remifentanil target-controlled infusion, to perform fiberoptic bronchoscopy in awake ICU patients. MATERIALS, PATIENTS AND

methodsThis monocentric, prospective observational study was conducted in awake patients requiring fiberoptic bronchoscopy. In accordance with usual practices in our center, remifentanil target-controlled infusion was used under close monitoring and adapted to the patient's reactions. The primary objective was the rate of successful procedures without additional analgesia or anesthesia. The secondary objectives were clinical tolerance and the comfort of patients (graded from "very uncomfortable" to "very comfortable") and operators (numeric scale from 0 to 10) during the procedure.

resultsFrom May 2014 to December 2015, 72 patients were included. Most of them (69%) were hypoxemic and admitted for acute respiratory failure. No additional medication was needed in 96% of the patients. No severe side-effects occurred. Seventy-eight percent of patients described the procedure as "comfortable or very comfortable". Physicians rated their comfort with a median [IQR] score of 9 [8-10].

conclusionRemifentanil target-controlled infusion administered to perform awake fiberoptic bronchoscopy in critically ill patients is feasible without requirement of additional analgesics or sedative drugs. Clinical tolerance as well as patients' and operators' comfort were good to excellent. This technique could benefit patients' experience.

Indexed as

ComfortFlexible fiberoptic bronchoscopyIntensive care unitRemifentanil target-controlled infusionTolerance

Identifiers

PMID33725225
PMCPMC7966657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.