Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34806658›Full record

Trial reportSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association

Continuous infusion of lidocaine in pediatric colonoscopy: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study.

Chao Yuan, Chengli Wang, Jiayao Wu, Ningyang Gao, Kunwei Li, Yongle Li, Xizhao Huang, Wei Huang, Zurong Hu

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Optimal drugs for sedation in pediatric colonoscopy.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chao YuanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Chengli WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, China.
Jiayao WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Ningyang GaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Kunwei LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Yongle LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Xizhao HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Wei HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Zurong HuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, China.
Guangdong Province Women and Children Hospital · CNSun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPropofol is commonly used for providing procedural sedation during pediatric colonoscopy. Intravenous (i.v.) lidocaine can mitigate visceral pain and reduce propofol requirements during surgery. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of i.v. lidocaine on perioperative propofol and sufentanil dose, pulse oxygen saturation, postoperative pain score, and recovery time during pediatric colonoscopy.

methodsWe designed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study and enrolled 40 children aged from 3 to 10 years who underwent colonoscopy. After titration of propofol to achieve unconsciousness, the patients were given i.v. lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg later 2 mg/kg

resultsLidocaine infusion resulted in a significant reduction in propofol requirements: (median (quartile) 1.8 (1.5-2.0) vs. 3.0 (2.8-3.3) mg/kg respectively; P < 0.001) and sufentanil requirements: (median (quartile) 0.06 (0.05-0.08) vs. 0.1 (0.1-0.1) μg/kg respectively; P < 0.001). The number of subjects who experienced oxygen desaturation below 95% in the lidocaine group was also significantly less than that in the control group: 1 vs. 6 (P = 0.04). The mean (SD) recovery time was significantly shorter in the lidocaine group: (19.2 (2.6) vs. 13.3 (2.6) min respectively; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in post-colonoscopy pain.

conclusionContinuous infusion of lidocaine resulted in reduction of propofol and sufentanil requirements, recovery time, and risk of hypoxemia during pediatric colonoscopy.

Indexed as

LidocainePropofolAnesthetics, IntravenousChildChild, PreschoolColonoscopyDouble-Blind MethodHumansAnesthetics, IntravenousLidocainePropofolLidocainepediatric colonoscopypropofolsufentanil

Identifiers

PMID34806658
PMCPMC8919925
OpenAlexW3170340324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.