Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35618650›Full record

Trial reportJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2022

Comparison of three sedation models for same-day painless bidirectional endoscopy: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Yue Sui, Xing Chen, Ting Ma, Junhui Lu, Tao Xiao, Zhenzhen Wang, Qing Wen, Guanfeng Wang, Hui Jia, Fengzhen Cao and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

14 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Yue SuiShanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0108-1503
Xing ChenShanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Ting MaShanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Junhui LuShanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Tao XiaoShanxi Cancer Hospital, Taiyuan, China.
Zhenzhen WangThe Second People's Hospital of Datong, Datong, China.
Qing WenThe Second People's Hospital of Datong, Datong, China.
Guanfeng WangThe Second People's Hospital of Datong, Datong, China.
Hui JiaErdos Kangning Physical Examination Center, Erdos, China.
Fengzhen CaoErdos Kangning Physical Examination Center, Erdos, China.
Xiaopeng WuLvliang Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Lvliang, China.
Yiping ZhangDatong Shoujia Digestive Disease Hospital, Datong, China.
Junlian HaoXiaoyi Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Xiaoyi, China.
Naping WangThe First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Yuncheng, China.
Shanxi Medical University · CNXian Yang Central Hospital · CNErasmus University Rotterdam · NLLinyi City Chinese Medicine Hospital · CNLuliang University · CNShanxi Datong University · CNShanxi Provincial Cancer Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimWe investigated the most beneficial propofol sedation model for same-day painless bidirectional endoscopy (BDE).

methodsAsymptomatic participants scheduled for same-day painless BDE examination from October 2020 to September 2021 were randomized to three groups: sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy followed by unsedated colonoscopy (Group A); sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy followed by sedated colonoscopy (Group B); and sedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy followed by sedated insertion colonoscopy (Group C). Patient discomfort, colonoscopy performance, doses of propofol, cardiovascular stress, anesthesia resuscitation, and sedation-related adverse events were evaluated.

resultsA total of 3200 participants were analyzed. Baseline demographics, patient discomfort, cecal intubation rate, adenoma detection rate and sedation-related adverse events were similar in the three groups. Propofol dose was the lowest in Group A (137.65 ± 36.865 mg) compared with Group B (177.71 ± 40.112 mg, P < 0.05) and Group C (161.63 ± 31.789 mg, P < 0.05). Decline in vital signs was most obvious in Group B during the procedure (P < 0.05). Recovery time was the shortest in Group A (5.01 ± 1.404 min) compared with Group B (9.51 ± 2.870 min, P < 0.05) and Group C (5.83 ± 2.594 min, P < 0.05); discharge time was the shortest in Group A (3.53 ± 1.685 min) compared with Group B (11.29 ± 5.172 min, P < 0.05) and Group C (6.47 ± 2.338 min, P < 0.05). Adenomas per positive patient of Group A (2.29 ± 1.055) and Group C (2.28 ± 0.931) were more than that in Group B (2.11 ± 0.946, P < 0.05).

conclusionsSedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy followed by unsedated colonoscopy is the superior model for same-day painless BDE with the benefits of satisfactory patient comfort, reduced sedation dose, less cardiovascular stress, faster recovery, shorter discharge time and high colonoscopy quality.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaPropofolCecumColonoscopyEndoscopy, GastrointestinalHumansHypnotics and SedativesPatient SatisfactionProcedural SedationProspective StudiesHypnotics and SedativesPropofoladenomaadverse eventsendoscopy, gastrointestinalpatient monitoringsedation

Identifiers

PMID35618650
PMCPMC9543240
OpenAlexW4281759942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.