Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36061400›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022

Efficacy and safety of the combination of propofol and S(+)-ketamine for procedural sedation in pediatric patients undergoing totally implantable venous access port implantation: A prospective randomized controlled study.

Yingjun Zhang, Chaopeng Ou, Xiaohui Bai, Jielan Lai, Wan Huang, Handong Ouyang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

6 authors.

Yingjun ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Chaopeng OuState Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaohui BaiGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Epigenetics and Gene Regulation, Department of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Jielan LaiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Wan HuangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Handong OuyangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) implantation is usually performed under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation in children. Procedural sedation without endotracheal intubation has been applied to minor pediatric surgeries like central venous catheter insertion. To explore a more efficient and less invasive anesthesia mode to implant TIVAPs for children, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of procedural sedation using propofol and S(+)-ketamine compared with general anesthesia. Methods: Sixty-six patients aged 6 months to 10 years undergoing TIVAP implantation were randomly allocated to two groups. Patients under procedural sedation [S(+)-ketamine-propofol (sketofol) group] were given target-controlled infusion of propofol 4 μg/ml using the Paedfusor model and S(+)-ketamine 0.5 mg/kg as induction, and had target-controlled infusion of propofol 3-4 μg/ml as maintenance. Patients in sketofol group received medium-flow oxygen inhalation through facemasks during surgery. Patients under general anesthesia (control group) were given propofol 2 mg/kg, cisatracurium 0.2 mg/kg, fentanyl 3 μg/kg as induction, and sevoflurane 0.8 minimum alveolar concentration as maintenance after endotracheal intubation. Primary outcome was the postoperative emergence agitation evaluated 5 min after awakening. Results: Postoperative emergence agitation evaluated 5 min after awakening was lower in sketofol group versus control group [1.0 (0.5, 1.0) vs. 3.0 (2.0, 4.0); median difference (95% CI): 2.0 (1.0, 2.0); Conclusions: Compared to general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation, procedural sedation using propofol and S(+)-ketamine improves the postoperative emergence agitation right after the recovery of consciousness, and has advantage in shortening anesthetic recovery time for pediatric patients undergoing TIVAP implantation.

Indexed as

pediatricprocedural sedationpropofolS(+)-ketaminetotally implantable venous access port

Identifiers

PMID36061400
PMCPMC9428347

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.