Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34112130›Full record

SynthesisBMC pulmonary medicine2021

Guidelines on analgosedation, monitoring, and recovery time for flexible bronchoscopy: a systematic review.

Daniel Strohleit, Thomas Galetin, Nils Kosse, Alberto Lopez-Pastorini, Erich Stoelben

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel Strohleit *Lung Clinic Cologne-Merheim, Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Cologne, University of Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany.
Thomas Galetin *Lung Clinic Cologne-Merheim, Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Cologne, University of Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany. thomas.galetin@uni-wh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5563-122X
Nils KosseLung Clinic Cologne-Merheim, Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Cologne, University of Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany.
Alberto Lopez-PastoriniLung Clinic Cologne-Merheim, Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Cologne, University of Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany.
Erich StoelbenLung Clinic Cologne-Merheim, Thoracic Surgery, Hospital of Cologne, University of Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109, Cologne, Germany.
Witten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients undergoing bronchoscopy in spontaneous breathing are prone to hypoxaemia and hypercapnia. Sedation, airway obstruction, and lung diseases impair respiration and gas exchange. The restitution of normal respiration takes place in the recovery room. Nonetheless, there is no evidence on the necessary observation time. We systematically reviewed current guidelines on bronchoscopy regarding sedation, monitoring and recovery.

methodsThis review was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42020197476). MEDLINE and awmf.org were double-searched for official guidelines, recommendation or consensus statements on bronchoscopy from 2010 to 2020. The PICO-process focussed on adults (Patients), bronchoscopy with maintained spontaneous breathing (Interventions), and recommendations regarding the intra- and postprocedural monitoring and sedation (O). The guideline quality was graded. A catalogue of 54 questions was answered. Strength of recommendation and evidence levels were recorded for each recommendation.

resultsSix guidelines on general bronchoscopy and three expert statements on special bronchoscopic procedures were identified. Four guidelines were evidence-based. Most guidelines recommend sedation to improve the patient's tolerance. Midazolam combined with an opioid is preferred. The standard monitoring consists of non-invasive blood pressure, and pulse oximetry, furthermore electrocardiogram in cardiac patients. Only one guideline discusses hypercapnia and capnometry, but without consensus. Two guidelines discuss a recovery time of two hours, but a recommendation was not given because of lack of evidence.

conclusionEvidence for most issues is low to moderate. Lung-diseased patients are not represented by current guidelines. Capnometry and recovery time lack evidence. More primary research in these fields is needed so that future guidelines may address these issues, too.

Indexed as

BronchoscopyGuidelines as TopicAdultAnalgesics, OpioidBlood Gas Monitoring, TranscutaneousCarbon DioxideHumansHypercapniaMidazolamPatient SafetyProcedural SedationAnalgesics, OpioidCarbon DioxideMidazolamBronchoscopyCapnometryGuidelineHypercapniaMonitoringPatient safetyRecovery time

Identifiers

PMID34112130
PMCPMC8193886
OpenAlexW3172823384

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.