Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2022
Safety and efficacy of an automated anesthesia delivery system for total intravenous anesthesia with propofol, remifentanil, and rocuronium: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial versus manually controlled anesthesia.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and evaluation of an automated phenylephrine delivery system by lower limit control for managing intraoperative hypotension.Journal of anesthesia · 2025Trial
- Application of Intravenous Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Hiatal Hernia Repair of Children.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Trial
- Prediction of surgery start for automated anesthesia using draping detection from surveillance videos.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- The Development of an Automated Fluid Infusion Management System to Prevent Hypotension During General Anesthesia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Relationship between the Measured Blood Concentration of Rocuronium in Stable Muscle Relaxation with a Closed-Loop Control and the Estimated Blood Concentration from a Pharmacokinetic Simulation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Anesthesia Management via an Automated Control System for Propofol, Remifentanil, and Rocuronium Compared to Management by Anesthesiologists: An Investigator-Initiated Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Sustainable development goals for Japanese anesthesiologists: how to survive in times of turmoil.Journal of anesthesia · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe have developed an automated anesthesia control system that uses biological information to provide closed-loop control of drug administration for total intravenous anesthesia with propofol, remifentanil, and rocuronium. In this study, we investigated whether the control of sedatives, analgesics, and muscle relaxants delivered by this system is non-inferior to that delivered by anesthesiologists.
methodsDuring anesthesia management by our automated administration control system and by anesthesiologists, the concentration of each drug at the site of effect (calculated from drug administration history) and biometric information (bispectral index, blood pressure, pulse rate, and single contraction ratio %T1) were tabulated during the period from the start to end of surgery. The primary efficacy endpoint was the ratio of adequate anesthesia time, in which all three factors of sedation, analgesia, and muscle relaxation were maintained within the target range, to the period from the start to end of surgery under total intravenous anesthesia.
resultsPercentage of time under appropriate anesthesia was 73.24 ± 17.24 in the automatic group (n = 28) and 59.94 ± 29.06 in the manual group (n = 28). The lower limit of the 97.5% one-sided confidence interval for the difference between the two group means was 0.51%, indicating the non-inferiority of the automatic group to the manual group (p = 0.002). The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups.
conclusionThe clinical use of our automated anesthesia control system should allow for the maintenance of adequate anesthesia by adjusting the doses of intravenous anesthetics in the same way as anesthesiologists do.
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.