ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2022
Efficacy of dexmedetomidine on peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2022. 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.
- Assessment of the effect of perineural dexmedetomidine on oxidative stress during peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: a randomized, controlled trial.International urology and nephrology · 2022Trial
- Application of low position percutaneous puncture plus rectus abdominis anterior sheath tunnel operation for peritoneal dialysis catheterization of end-stage renal disease.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Conscious sedation anesthesia using different doses of remifentanil combined with dexmedetomidine for peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation.Renal failure · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDexmedetomidine (DEX) is a sedative agent with minimal respiratory and hemodynamic effects. The present study aimed to evaluate its effectiveness in peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent PD catheter insertion under spinal anesthesia in our hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. Patients were divided into the DEX and non-DEX groups according the use of DEX. After 1:1 propensity score matching to adjust for age, sex, body mass index, mean blood pressure (BP), and Charlson comorbidity index, we compared operation-related outcomes, including peak numerical rating scale (NRS), occurrence of nausea, vital signs, or operative time between the two groups.
resultsOf a total of 44 patients, 9 patients received DEX, and 35 did not. After propensity score matching, each group consisted of 8 patients. Peak NRS was significantly lower (P = 0.003) in the DEX group compared with the non-DEX group. Maximum mean BP during the operation was also significantly lower in the DEX group compared with the non-DEX group (P = 0.020), with no significant differences in minimum mean BP between the two groups (P = 0.831). The DEX group showed a trend of shortened operative time (P = 0.068). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of nausea (P = 1.000). Moreover, there was no clinically important adverse event associated with use of DEX.
conclusionThe use of DEX in PD catheter insertion under spinal anesthesia could safely improve operative analgesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34143371What 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.