Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35813045›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022

The Safety of Propofol Versus Sevoflurane for General Anesthesia in Children: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Ying Zhao, Feng Qin, Yuhang Liu, Yanping Dai, Xiaobo Cen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ying ZhaoNational Chengdu Center for Safety Evaluation of Drugs, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy/Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Feng QinNational Chengdu Center for Safety Evaluation of Drugs, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy/Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yuhang LiuAndrology Laboratory, Department of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yanping DaiNational Chengdu Center for Safety Evaluation of Drugs, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy/Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xiaobo CenNational Chengdu Center for Safety Evaluation of Drugs, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy/Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sichuan University · CNState Key Laboratory of Biotherapy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Propofol and sevoflurane are the most used anesthetics for pediatric surgery. Emergence agitation, postoperative nausea and vomiting and postoperative pain are the primary adverse effect of these general anesthetics. Many clinical studies had compared the safety of propofol and sevoflurane in pediatric surgery, but the results were controversial. Objectives: To evaluate the evidence surrounding the safety of propofol versus sevoflurane for general anesthesia in children. Methods: Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Vip Data were searched to collect relevant articles. Trials were strictly selected according to previously defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analyses. Results: Twenty randomized controlled trials recruiting 1,550 children for general anesthesia were included, with overall low-moderate methodological quality. There was evidence that compared with sevoflurane anesthesia, propofol anesthesia significantly decreased the incidence of emergence agitation (OR = 4.99, 95% CI, 3.67-6.80; Conclusions: This review reveals that the children who received propofol anesthesia had the lower risks of emergence agitation, postoperative nausea and vomiting and postoperative pain when compared with sevoflurane anesthesia. But the children who received sevoflurane recovered slightly faster than those received propofol. Considering the limitations of the included studies, better methodological quality and large controlled trials are expected to further quantify the safety of propofol and sevoflurane for general anesthesia in children.

Indexed as

childrengeneral anesthesiameta-analysispropofolsevoflurane

Identifiers

PMID35813045
PMCPMC9257067
OpenAlexW4283378029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.