Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38966589›Full record

ArticleBJA open2024

An

Kenneth Barker, Michael Stewart, Alison Rutter, Phillip D Whitfield, Ian L Megson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kenneth BarkerDepartment of Anaesthetics, NHS Highland, Inverness, UK.
Michael StewartDepartment of Anaesthetics, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK.
Alison RutterBiomedical Sciences, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, UK.
Phillip D WhitfieldGlasgow Polyomics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Ian L MegsonBiomedical Sciences, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Intravenous lipid emulsion is recognised as a therapy for rescue in cases of local anaesthetic toxicity, but its use in reversing overdose or toxicity related to other drugs remains the subject of debate. This Methods: Twenty-seven drugs and associated metabolites were screened for the ability of intravenous lipid emulsion to reduce the amount of free drug in the aqueous phase, using specialised cassettes designed for this purpose. The relative amount of drug equilibrating across the membrane from plasma to phosphate-buffered saline was measured, using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, at a 6 h timepoint in plasma samples treated with intravenous lipid emulsion and paired, untreated controls. Results: The data obtained were plotted against measures of partition (LogP and cLogD Conclusions: Modulation of free drug in the aqueous compartment is broadly predictable by the partition coefficient, although ramipril was identified to be an outlier in this regard. Further mechanistic and clinical exploration is merited to establish a standardised protocol for lipid emulsion therapy.

Indexed as

drug overdosedrug partitionintralipid therapyprotein bindingprotocol development

Identifiers

PMID38966589
PMCPMC11223081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.