Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39031233›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2024

Comparing the haemodynamic effects of high- and low-dose opioid anaesthesia: a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

O M Marges, J P Nieboer, I N de Keijzer, R Rettab, K van Amsterdam, T W L Scheeren, A R A Absalom, H E M Vereecke, M M R F Struys, J J Vos and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

O M MargesDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
J P NieboerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
I N de KeijzerDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4464-2905
R RettabDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
K van AmsterdamDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0005-9421-3836
T W L ScheerenDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9184-4190
A R A AbsalomDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7563-9157
H E M VereeckeDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3688-785X
M M R F StruysDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0421-536X
J J VosDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0597-6462
J P van den BergDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands. j.p.van.den.berg@umcg.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-5624-714X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Post-induction hypotension (MAP < 65 mmHg) occurs frequently and is usually caused by the cardiovascular adverse effects of the anaesthetic induction drugs used. We hypothesize that a clinically significant difference in the incidence and severity of hypotension will be found when different doses of propofol and remifentanil are used for induction of anaesthesia.

methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial wherein four groups (A-D) of patients received one out of four different combinations of propofol and remifentanil, titrated to a predicted equipotency in probability of tolerance to laryngoscopy (PTOL) according to the Bouillon interaction model. In group A, a high dose of propofol and a low dose of remifentanil was administered, and across the groups this ratio was gradually changed until it was reversed in group D. Mean and systolic arterial blood pressure (MAP, SAP) were compared at four time points (T

resultsData from 76 patients was used. At T

conclusionInduction of anaesthesia with different predicted equipotent combinations of propofol and remifentanil did result in statistically different but clinically irrelevant differences in haemodynamic endpoints during induction of anaesthesia. Our study could not identify preferable drug combinations that decrease the risk for hypotension after induction, although they all yield a similar predicted PTOL.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidBlood PressureHeart RateHemodynamicsHypotensionPropofolRemifentanilAdultAgedAnesthesiaAnesthetics, IntravenousDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleHumansLaryngoscopyMaleAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, IntravenousPiperidinesPropofolRemifentanilGeneral anaesthesiaHaemodynamicsHypotensionInductionPharmacology

Identifiers

PMID39031233
PMCPMC11604680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.