Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2023
Safety of prone emergence from general endotracheal anesthesia in patients undergoing ERCP: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of lateral versus supine positioning on hypoxaemia in sedated adults: multicentre randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Trial
- Comparative efficacy and safety of supine versus prone positioning in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- New Trends in Airway Management During Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Commentary: Comparative efficacies of various corticosteroids for preventing postextubation stridor and reintubation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional supine emergence and prone extubation from general endotracheal anesthesia (GEA) are associated with extubation-related adverse events (ERAEs). Given the minimally invasive nature of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as well as the improved ventilation/perfusion matching and easier airway opening in the prone position, we aimed to assess the safety of prone emergence and extubation in patients undergoing ERCP under GEA.
methodsTotally, 242 eligible patients were recruited and randomized into the supine extubation group (n = 121; supine group) and the prone extubation group (n = 121; prone group). The primary endpoint was the incidence of ERAEs during emergence, including hemodynamic fluctuations, coughing, stridor, and hypoxemia requiring airway maneuvers. The secondary endpoints included the incidence of monitoring disconnections, extubation time, recovery time, room exit time, and post-procedure sore throat.
resultsThe incidence of ERAEs was significantly lower in the prone group compared with the supine group (8.3% vs 34.7%, OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.18-0.56; P < 0.001). Moreover, the prone group demonstrated no monitoring disconnections, shorter extubation time and room exit time, faster recovery, and, lower frequency and milder sore throat after the procedure.
conclusionsFor patients undergoing ERCP under GEA, compared with supine, prone emergence, and extubation had remarkably lower rates of EAREs and better recovery, and can maintain continuous monitoring and improve efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37415015What 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.