ArticleTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2023
Comparison of Dexmedetomidine with Midazolam as an adjuvant with Propofol for insertion of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in Children.
Article in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePropofol is required in higher doses for smooth insertion of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway. The ideal adjuvant drug so as to minimise induction doses of propofol is still not known. Dexmedetomidine and midazolam are equally effective for premedication in children. We have designed this study to compare dexmedetomidine and midazolam as adjuvants with propofol for insertion characteristics of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway.
methodsA total of 130 paediatric patients undergoing elective surgery were randomly allocated into 2 groups of 65 each. One group was induced using propofol, fentanyl and midazolam, whereas the other group received propofol, fentanyl and dexmedetomidine. Subsequently, insertion characteristics of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway were documented in terms of number of attempts and by using modified Muzi score. Post-operative sedation was recorded by Ramsay Sedation Scale and pain was assessed by using Wong-Baker Faces pain scale.
resultsOut of 130 patients, ProSeal laryngeal mask airway was inserted in a second attempt in only 5 patients of midazolam group. Time taken for insertion was significantly higher among the midazolam group (21 seconds) than the dexmedetomidine group (19 seconds). A total of 93.8% of patients administered dexmedetomidine had excellent Muzi scores in comparison to midazolam group where only 13.8% patients had excellent Muzi scores (P < .001).
conclusionDexmedetomidine in a dose of 1 μg kg-1 as compared to midazolam (20 μg kg-1) produces better insertion characteristics for ProSeal laryngeal mask airway when used as adjuvant with propofol in terms of jaw opening, ease of insertion, coughing, gagging, patient movement, and laryngospasm.
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.