Trial reportBMC pulmonary medicine2022
Dexmedetomidine versus propofol sedation in flexible bronchoscopy: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04211298 (Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol Sedation in Flexible Bronchoscopy), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 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.
Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol Sedation in Flexible Bronchoscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrophysiological differences of randomized deep sedation with dexmedetomidine versus propofol.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Trial
- Dexmedetomidine-ketamine combination versus fentanyl-midazolam for patient sedation during flexible bronchoscopy: a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Trial
- Efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine in adult patients undergoing bronchoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Review
- A Prospective Comparative Non-randomized Study of Ketofol Versus Midazolam Sedation in Flexible Bronchoscopy.Cureus · 2026Article
- Comparative Safety of Intravenous Sedatives for Bronchoscopy: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Yonsei medical journal · 2026Article
- Standardized anesthetic and ventilation protocol to prevent atelectasis during robotic-assisted bronchoscopy: retrospective observational study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Observational
- Comparative analysis of guidelines and recommendations for sedation during flexible bronchoscopy: a narrative review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Review
- Meta-analysis of the sedative effects of midazolam and dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing bronchoscopy.American journal of clinical and experimental immunology · 2025Article
- Anesthesia for Bronchoscopy-An Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The different doses of sufentanil combined with nalmefene in bronchoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of remimazolam in bronchoscopic sedation: A meta-analysis.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Foreign body aspirations in dental clinics: a narrative review.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2022Review
- Airway management and outcomes in surgical drainage of severe odontogenic infections: a retrospective cohort study.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDexmedetomidine (DEX), is a highly selective alpha2 adrenoceptor (α2-AR) agonist, successfully used in various procedures including flexible bronchoscopy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating DEX sedation during bronchoscopy report equivocal results regarding respiratory and hemodynamic outcomes.
methodsWe conducted an RCT to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine compared to propofol for sedation during bronchoscopy. The primary outcome was the number of desaturation events, secondary outcomes were transcutaneous Pco2 level, hemodynamic adverse events and physician and patient satisfaction.
resultsOverall, 63 patients were included, 30 and 33 in the DEX and propofol groups, respectively. The number of desaturation events was similar between groups, median (IQR) 1 (0-1) and 1 (0-2) in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P = 0.29). Median desaturation time was 1 (0-2) and 1 (0-3) minutes in the DEX and control groups, respectively (P = 0.48). Adverse events included hypotension, 33% vs 21.1% in intervention and control groups, respectively (P = 0.04), bradycardia, cough, and delayed recovery from sedation. Total adverse events were 22 and 7 in DEX and propofol groups, respectively (P = 0.009).
conclusionDexmedetomidine sedation during bronchoscopy did not show differences in oxygen saturation and transcutaneous CO2 level in comparison to propofol. Moreover, DEX sedation required a significantly higher number of rescue boluses, due to inadequate sedation and was associated with a higher rate of adverse events. Trial registration NCT04211298, registration date: 26.12.2019.
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.