Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36385453›Full record

Trial reportCNS drugs2022

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Positive-Controlled, Non-Inferiority, Phase III Clinical Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Emulsified Isoflurane for Anesthesia Induction in Patients.

Hui Yang, YuJun Zhang, ChuiLiang Liu, YangWen Ou, YuHang Zhu, Yun Xue, GaoFeng Zhao, YuShuang Lin, Chun Chen, GuoHai Xu and 6 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyClinical Trial, Phase III
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in CNS drugs, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 72% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Hui Yang *Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
YuJun Zhang *Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
ChuiLiang LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chancheng District Central Hospital of Foshan City, Foshan, Fujian, China.
YangWen OuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Xiangya, Hunan, China.
YuHang ZhuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical College, Zunyi, Guizhou, China.
Yun XueDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chongqing University Fuling Hospital, Fuling, Chongqing, China.
GaoFeng ZhaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
YuShuang LinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhangzhou Affiliated Hospital of FuJian Medical University, Zhangzhou, Fujian, China.
Chun ChenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yichang Central People's Hospital, Yichang, Hubei, China.
GuoHai XuDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China.
KaiMing YuanDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Qiang WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xian, Shanxi, China.
Min ZhangHumanwell Healthcare (Group) Co., Ltd, Yichang, Hubei, China.
LiE LiHumanwell Healthcare (Group) Co., Ltd, Yichang, Hubei, China.
Jin LiuDepartment of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
WenSheng ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. zhang_ws@scu.edu.cn.
West China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNHumanwell Healthcare Group (China) · CNAffiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical College · CNCentral South University · CNChongqing University · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University · CNFoshan Municipal Government · CNGuangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNSecond Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University · CNSichuan University · CNWenzhou Medical University · CNYichang Central People's Hospital · CNZhangzhou Municipal Hospital of Fujian Province · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmulsified isoflurane was designed to circumvent the deficiencies of inhalation anesthetics, which have a longer time to onset, result in a higher drug consumption, and for which a specific anesthesia machine is required for clinical use. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of emulsified isoflurane with propofol for anesthesia induction in adults patients.

methodsThis multicenter, randomized, double-blind, positive-controlled, non-inferiority, phase III clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of emulsified isoflurane with propofol for anesthesia induction. Each patient in the emulsified isoflurane group received a single bolus injection of 12% emulsified isoflurane at a dose of 30 mg/kg, and each patient in the propofol group received a single bolus injection of 0.8% propofol at a dose of 2 mg/kg. The primary outcome of the efficacy evaluation was the proportion of participants with successful anesthesia induction, which was regarded as a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) score of < 1 and lack of use of other sedative drugs. A number of secondary efficacy outcomes were also assessed. Safety was monitored based on (1) adverse events, (2) repeated measurement of vital signs; (3) physical examination, (4) routine laboratory examinations of hematology, biochemistry, urine, coagulation function, and (5) 12-lead electrocardiogram.

resultsA total of 416 patients were enrolled (n = 208 in each group) and 398 patients were administered study drug. The proportion of participants with successful anesthesia induction was 100% with a 95% confidence interval of - 1.9% to + 1.9% for the emulsified isoflurane and propofol groups, which met the predesigned non-inferiority criteria of 5%. The study demonstrated the non-inferiority of sedation produced by emulsified isoflurane compared to propofol. Among the secondary efficacy outcomes, emulsified isoflurane showed a better cardiovascular stability than propofol. The number of patients from the emulsified isoflurane group who experienced drug-related adverse events was significantly higher than that of patients from the propofol group. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of adverse events or drug-related adverse events of grades 3-5.

conclusionsEmulsified isoflurane exhibited non-inferiority of anesthesia/sedation compared to propofol in patients undergoing anesthesia induction. CLINICAL

trial registrationChiCTR2000038185, registered on 12 December, 2020 ( www.chictr.org.cn ).

Indexed as

AnesthesiaIsofluranePropofolAdultBlood CoagulationDouble-Blind MethodHumansIsofluranePropofol

Identifiers

PMID36385453
OpenAlexW4309138948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.