Trial reportBMC pulmonary medicine2023
Effect of intravenous vs. inhaled penehyclidine on respiratory mechanics in patients during one-lung ventilation for thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06624696 (Inhaling Penehyclidine to Prevent Perioperative Respiratory Adverse Events in Children at Risk Undergoing Sevoflurane Anesthesia), which is 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.
Inhaling Penehyclidine to Prevent Perioperative Respiratory Adverse Events in Children at Risk Undergoing Sevoflurane Anesthesia: a Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMinimising postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after thoracic surgery is of utmost importance. A major factor contributing to PPCs is the driving pressure, which is determined by the ratio of tidal volume to lung compliance. Inhalation and intravenous administration of penehyclidine can improve lung compliance during intraoperative mechanical ventilation. Therefore, our study aimed to compare the efficacy of inhaled vs. intravenous penehyclidine during one-lung ventilation (OLV) in mitigating driving pressure and mechanical power among patients undergoing thoracic surgery.
methodsA double-blind, prospective, randomised study involving 176 patients scheduled for elective thoracic surgery was conducted. These patients were randomly divided into two groups, namely the penehyclidine inhalation group and the intravenous group before their surgery. Driving pressure was assessed at T
resultsAll 167 participants, 83 from the intravenous group and 84 from the inhalation group, completed the trial. The AUC of driving pressure for the intravenous group was 39.50 ± 9.42, while the inhalation group showed a value of 41.50 ± 8.03 (P = 0.138). The incidence of PPCs within 7 days after surgery was 27.7% in the intravenous group and 23.8% in the inhalation group (P = 0.564). No significant differences were observed in any of the other secondary outcomes between the two groups (all P > 0.05).
conclusionsOur study found that among patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery, no significant differences were observed in the driving pressure and mechanical power during OLV between those who received an intravenous injection of penehyclidine and those who inhaled it. Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the incidence of PPCs between the two groups.
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.