Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40474220›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2025

Volatile sedation in critically ill adults undergoing mechanical ventilation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Taihei Yamamoto, Yuki Kotani, Koya Akutagawa, Tomohisa Nagayama, Maho Tomimatsu, Mayuko Tonai, Toshiyuki Karumai, Yoshiro Hayashi

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Taihei YamamotoDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, 296-8602, Japan.
Yuki KotaniDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, 296-8602, Japan. kotani.yuki@kameda.jp.
Koya AkutagawaEmergency and Trauma Center, Kameda Medical Center, Kamogawa, Japan.
Tomohisa NagayamaDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, 296-8602, Japan.
Maho TomimatsuEmergency and Trauma Center, Kameda Medical Center, Kamogawa, Japan.
Mayuko TonaiDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, 296-8602, Japan.
Toshiyuki KarumaiDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, 296-8602, Japan.
Yoshiro HayashiDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Kameda Medical Center, 929 Higashi-cho, Kamogawa, 296-8602, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVolatile sedation has been associated with lung-protective effects, attenuation of inflammatory responses, and reduced organ dysfunction in critically ill patients. However, whether these potential benefits may translate into improvements in clinically relevant outcomes remains unclear. The primary aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was to test the hypothesis that volatile sedation, compared to intravenous sedation, would reduce mortality in critically ill adults receiving mechanical ventilation.

methodsThis study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023458064). We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception until March 18, 2025, for RCTs comparing volatile sedatives with intravenous sedatives in critically ill patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up. The secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hypotension, acute kidney injury, delirium, postoperative nausea and vomiting, atrial fibrillation, and time from sedative discontinuation to extubation. A random-effects Mantel-Haenszel meta-analysis was used for data synthesis. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to assess the robustness of the pooled data for the primary outcome.

resultsWe included 21 RCTs, comprising 2367 patients. Compared to intravenous sedation, volatile sedation may increase mortality at the longest follow-up (262/1107 vs. 218/1106; relative risk: 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.35; low certainty). However, TSA suggested a lack of definitive conclusion, as the required sample size was 12,080. No meaningful effects were observed on secondary outcomes, except for slightly shortened time from sedation termination to extubation (mean difference, - 90.62 min; 95% confidence interval, - 124.64 to - 56.60; low certainty),

conclusionsThis meta-analysis of RCTs showed that, compared to intravenous sedation, volatile sedation may increase mortality among mechanically ventilated critically ill adults. Based on the current randomized evidence, its use in the ICU should be limited to carefully selected clinical scenarios. Further research is needed to identify patient populations that may benefit from this sedation strategy.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessRespiration, ArtificialAdultHumansHypnotics and SedativesIntensive Care UnitsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHypnotics and SedativesIntensive care unitsMechanical ventilationMeta-analysisSedationSystematic reviewVolatile anesthetics

Identifiers

PMID40474220
PMCPMC12142876

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.