ArticleAmerican journal of clinical and experimental urology2023
Comparison of intravenous sedation with propofol, dexmedetomidine and midazolam in double-J ureteral stent removal.
Article in American journal of clinical and experimental urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2024Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccording to the favorable effects of combination therapy to provide better sedation during double-j stent removal and lack of studies investigating the sedative effect of propofol, dexmedetomidine, and midazolam during this procedure. This study aimed to compare the effects of intravenous sedation with propofol, dexmedetomidine and midazolam in double-J ureteral stent removal.
methodsThis double-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted on 120 patients aged 18-72 who underwent double-J ureteral stent removal in Alzahra hospital, Isfahan, Iran from September to November 2021. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups. In the first group, propofol was titrated with normal saline and was infused with a loading dose of 0.5 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 1.5-2.5 mg/kg/h. In the second group, Dexmedetomidine was titrated with normal saline and was infused at a dose of 1 µg/kg within 10 min and then continued at 0.45-0.55 µg/kg. In third group, midazolam was titrated was infused with a loading dose of 0.05 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 0.05 mg/kg/h. 50 mg of fentanyl was also infused in all the groups. If the patients did not reach the desired sedation level, 10 mg ketamine was infused as a rescue sedative agent for all three groups and repeated if needed in all groups.
resultsThe current study was conducted on 120 patients who underwent double-J ureteral stent removal. The comparison of the sedative effect of midazolam, dexmedetomidine, and propofol showed significant differences among the three groups and was higher in the midazolam group (P=0.018). Between the three groups systolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure was significantly lower in the propofol group (P=0.002). Heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group during both surgery and recovery time (P<0.001). There was no significant difference among the groups during surgery regarding oxygen saturation (
conclusionAccording to this study midazolam was superior to two other groups and was associated with deeper sedation and higher satisfaction among both patient and surgeon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37168936PMC10165230W4376223946What 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.