Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39759290›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2024

Online monitoring of propofol concentrations in exhaled breath.

Xiaoxiao Li, Pan Chang, Wensheng Zhang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 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

3 authors.

Xiaoxiao LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Pan ChangDepartment of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Wensheng ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Propofol, a widely used intravenous anesthetic agent, requires accurate monitoring to ensure therapeutic efficacy and prevent oversedation. Recent developments in modern analytical instrumentation have led to significant breakthroughs in on-line analysis of exhaled breath. This review discusses several sophisticated analytical methods that have been explored for noninvasive, real-time monitoring of propofol concentrations, including proton transfer reaction mass spectrometry, selected ion flow tube mass spectrometry, ion mobility spectrometry, and gas chromatography coupled to surface acoustic wave sensors. These techniques have demonstrated good correlations between plasma and exhaled propofol concentrations and between exhaled propofol concentrations and its cerebral effects. Despite these advances, the use of these technologies in clinical settings is hampered by challenges such as equipment noise, bulkiness, and high cost, as well as limitations related to endotracheal intubation, strong adsorption of propofol to components of the respiratory circuit, variability in respiratory patterns, susceptibility to changes in pulmonary ventilation and blood flow, inconsistencies in calibration methods, and the influence of other drugs and temperature fluctuations on measurement accuracy. Overcoming these technical and procedural challenges is critical to advancing the clinical application of breath analysis for propofol monitoring. This article reviews published studies and summarizes the progress and ongoing challenges in the field.

Indexed as

Analytical instrumentChallengeExhaled breathProgressPropofol concentration

Identifiers

PMID39759290
PMCPMC11699084

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.