SynthesisPloS one2023
Efficacy of nitrous oxide in adults undergoing puncture biopsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNitrous oxide (N2O) with rapid analgesic effect is often used to relieve pain induced by diagnostic procedures. This review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of N2O in patients undergoing puncture biopsy.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and the ClinicalTrials.gov up to March, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they investigated the effect of N2O in adults undergoing puncture biopsy. The primary outcome was pain score. Secondary outcomes included anxiety score, patient satisfaction and side effects.
resultsTwelve RCTs with 1070 patients were included in the qualitative review, of which eleven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis suggested that compared with the controls (placebo, lidocaine and midazolam), N2O had better analgesic effect (MD -1.12, 95% CI -2.12 to -0.13, P = 0.03; I2 = 94%). In addition, N2O significantly alleviated patient anxiety (MD = -1.79, 95% CI -2.41 to -1.18, P<0.00001; I2 = 0%) and improved patient satisfaction (MD 1.81, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.50, P = 0.04; I2 = 92%). There was no significant difference regrading the risk of nausea (RR 2.56; 95% CI 0.70 to 9.31, P = 0.15; I2 = 0%), headache (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.33, P = 0.48; I2 = 46%), dizziness (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 5.13, P = 0.27; I2 = 0%) or euphoria (RR 2.67, 95% CI 0.81 to 8.79, P = 0.11; I2 = 8%) between the N2O group and the control group.
conclusionThe present review suggested that N2O might be effective for pain management in patients undergoing puncture biopsy.
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.