ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Effects of adding dexmedetomidine to nebulized lidocaine on control of hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Comparing Intravenous Versus Nebulized Either Lidocaine or Dexmedetomidine for Attenuation of the Hemodynamic Responses to Laryngoscopy and Intubation
Effect of Lidocaine, Dexmedetomidine, Esmolol and Magnesium Use on Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter and Hemodynamic Response After Laryngoscopy: Randomized, Controlled, Double-blind Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pupillometry as a Novel Tool for Pain Monitoring: Evaluating the Antinociceptive Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine During Orotracheal Intubation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A prospective-randomized placebo-controlled trial comparing the effects of nebulized dexmedetomidine v/s dexmedetomidine-lignocaine mixture on intraoperative hemodynamics and surgical field quality in patients undergoing endoscopic transnasal transsphenoidal pituitary tumor surgery.Surgical neurology international · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Hemodynamic responses (HDR) to laryngoscopy and intubation are a significant concern for the anesthesiologist. This study aimed to compare the effects of intravenous Dexmedetomidine and nebulized Lidocaine for control of HDR to laryngoscopy and intubation when used in combination or alone. Material and Methods: This double-blind, parallel group, randomized clinical trial included 90 patients (30 for each group) aged 18-55 years with ASA grade 1-2. Group DL received intravenous (IV) Dexmedetomidine (1 μg kg Results: Post-intubation HR was better controlled in group DL than group D and group L (76.40 ± 5.61, 95.16 ± 10.60, 103.90 ± 12.98 respectively, Conclusion: We found the addition of intravenous Dexmedetomidine to nebulized Lidocaine to be superior in controlling the increase in HR and MBP post-intubation with no adverse effects.
Indexed as
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.