ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Evaluating Efficiency of Propofol and Dexmedetomidine for Hypotensive Anesthesia in ENT Operations.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of dexmedetomidine on stress and inflammatory responses in patients with nasotracheal intubation after oral and maxillofacial surgery.American journal of translational research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: During ENT procedures, hypotensive anesthesia is essential for enhancing operative vision and reducing blood loss. Both dexmedetomidine and propofol are commonly used medications with different modes of action. The effectiveness of these medicines in producing controlled hypotension during ENT operations is assessed in this research. Materials and Methods: Sixty individuals between the ages of 18 and 60 who were having elective ENT operations participated in a prospective randomized clinical study. Patients were split into two groups: 30 patients in Group A got an infusion of propofol, and 30 patients in Group B received an infusion of dexmedetomidine. During surgery, hemodynamic measures such as heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were monitored. A visual analog scale (VAS) with a range of 0 (poor) to 10 (excellent) was used to evaluate the quality of the surgical field. Recovery periods were compared, and blood loss was noted. A paired Results: The mean MAP for Group B was 60 ± 4 mmHg ( Conclusion: During ENT procedures, dexmedetomidine was superior to propofol in terms of lowering intraoperative blood loss, enhancing surgical field quality, and producing controlled hypotension. Its usage, nevertheless, could be linked to somewhat longer recovery periods. In ENT procedures, dexmedetomidine is regarded as an excellent drug for hypotensive anesthesia.
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.