SynthesisAnesthesia progress2024
Comparison of Anesthetics for Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion: A Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Anesthesia progress, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Low-dose mivacurium facilitates laryngeal mask airway insertion in patients undergoing hysteroscopic surgery: a prospective, single-center, double-blind randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
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
Objective: This study aimed to establish which anesthetic agents are associated with minimized adverse outcomes during laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion. Methods: Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with American Society of Anesthesiologists I or II adult patients (≥15 years of age) receiving general anesthesia (GA) with an LMA. Propofol only was the comparator to other anesthetics used during LMA insertion. The primary outcome was prolonged apnea, and secondary outcomes were adverse airway events, LMA insertion failure, inadequate depth of anesthesia, and hemodynamic events. A network meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the treatment effects (odds ratios, 95% credible intervals, and surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA]). Results: A total of 28 anesthetic combinations used on 4695 patients for GA induction and LMA insertion were examined across 53 RCTs. Overall, there was an apnea incidence rate of 33.3% (849 of 2548) with a mean time of 3.74 ± 3.56 minutes (n = 3091). Propofol + dexmedetomidine had the highest overall summed score of SUCRA ranks in reducing adverse outcomes (apnea incidence: SUCRA = 37%, apnea time: SUCRA = 66%, airway adverse event: SUCRA = 67%, insertion failure: SUCRA = 73%, inadequate depth of anesthesia: SUCRA = 84%). In comparison among all propofol combinations, propofol alone ranked lowest for overall summed score of SUCRA in reducing adverse outcomes (apnea incidence: SUCRA = 47%, apnea time: SUCRA = 71%, airway adverse event: SUCRA = 9%, insertion failure: SUCRA = 20%, inadequate depth of anesthesia: SUCRA = 9%). Conclusion: All anesthetic combinations, other than those with thiopental, reduced adverse outcomes as compared with propofol alone. The combination of propofol and dexmedetomidine infused over 10 minutes ranked as the most effective for reducing adverse outcomes during LMA insertion.
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.