ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2024
Comparison between dexmedetomidine and lidocaine for attenuation of cough response during tracheal extubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- "Nebulized lidocaine for intractable cough in hospice care: a comprehensive review of efficacy, safety, and future perspectives".BMC palliative care · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of Preoperative Esketamine Nebulized Inhalation on Cough Reflex, Sedation, and Postoperative Sore Throat in Extubation of Surgical Patients: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Article
- A comparative evaluation of efficacy of lignocaine and dexmedetomidine to attenuate hemodynamic and airway responses to endotracheal extubation in elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical study.Anesthesia and pain medicine · 2026Article
- Strengthening patient safety through biosafety and infection prevention measures during COVID-19: a policy and practice review.Frontiers in health services · 2026Review
- Meta-analysis - interpretation of forest plots: A wood for the trees.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Trial sequential analysis: Quality improvement for meta-analysis.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Tracheal extubation often causes cardiovascular and airway responses, potentially resulting in hazardous consequences. It remains unknown whether dexmedetomidine or lidocaine is more effective for cough suppression. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the effectiveness and safety of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine in reducing cough response after tracheal extubation in adult patients. Methods: A thorough search of electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, was conducted to identify relevant studies (from inception to 31 January 2023). Randomised controlled trials comparing intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine versus IV lidocaine administration during emergence from anaesthesia to prevent tracheal extubation response in adult patients under general anaesthesia were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of post-extubation cough. Secondary outcomes included emergence time, extubation time, residual sedation, and incidences of bradycardia. Statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan software. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the potential risk for bias. Results: In total, seven studies with 450 participants were included. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of cough between dexmedetomidine and lidocaine groups [Risk Ratio = 0.76; 95% Confidence Interval: 0.46, 1.24]. Emergence and extubation times were not significantly different between the two groups. Meta-analysis revealed a higher incidence of bradycardia and residual sedation in dexmedetomidine compared to the lidocaine group. Conclusion: This meta-analysis found no difference in cough, emergence, and extubation time between dexmedetomidine and lidocaine after tracheal extubation. However, residual sedation and bradycardia were more significant in dexmedetomidine than in lidocaine.
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.