Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025
Photoplethysmography parameters in monitoring nociception during general anesthesia.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundValidated monitoring methods for evaluating the balance of nociception and anti-nociception (BNAN) are needed in general anesthesia. This study assessed six photoplethysmography (PPG) parameters, computed from finger photoplethysmographic waveforms in patients undergoing gynecological surgery under general anesthesia.
methodsA total of 20 participants were included, each undergoing general anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. The same concentration of remifentanil was maintained throughout the experiment, four different intensities of electrical stimulation were administered, and the patient's fingertip PPG was meticulously recorded. PPG data were preprocessed to extract six PPG morphological parameters, and photoplethysmographic amplitude (PPGA), pulse beat interval (PBI), and surgical pleth index (SPI). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) were constructed and calculated to accurately measure its ability to reflect the nociceptive stimulus state. The consistency of different phase parameters at different stimulus intensities was evaluated by calculating the prediction probabilities. All results were compared with those obtained using SPI, PPGA, and PBI.
resultsAfter stimulation, all parameters and SPI showed significant changes compared with those before stimulation (p = 0.000). The catacrotic phase parameters (AC and MHC) showed higher discrimination in adequate analgesia and congruence with electrical stimulation intensity than the overall phase parameters, PPGA, and anacrotic phase parameters (AC: AUC = 0.851, Pk = 0.800; MHC: AUC = 0.837, Pk = 0.792).
conclusionsIn this study, six PPG morphological parameters were proposed and observed for the first time to effectively distinguish the occurrence of nociception. Compared with the overall phase parameters, PPGA, and anacrotic phase parameters, catacrotic phase parameters were more capable of characterizing noxious stimuli and more consistent with changes in electrical stimulation intensity.
trial registrationChiCTR2200062228; Registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov on July 30, 2022.
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.