Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40689106›Full record

ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2024

Comparing the Sedative Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Propofol in Mechanically Ventilated Patients Using Salivary Alpha-Amylase as a Stress Marker: A Randomized Open-Label Trial.

Ahmed Mohamed Ibrahim, Mohammed Said ElSharkawy, Reda Khalil Abdelrahman, Abdallah Elabd Hassan, Mohammed Gaber Ibrahim Saad, Ismail Ahmed Elzoughari, Abdelkarem Hussini Ismail Alsayed, Asmaa Abdelbadie, Rehab Abd El Fattah Helal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  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

9 authors.

Ahmed Mohamed IbrahimAnesthesiology, Surgical Intensive Care and Pain Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2473-7381
Mohammed Said ElSharkawyAnesthesiology, Surgical Intensive Care and Pain Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0814-6728
Reda Khalil AbdelrahmanAnesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Damietta, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7137-7421
Abdallah Elabd HassanAnesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4083-3407
Mohammed Gaber Ibrahim SaadAnesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4244-9377
Ismail Ahmed ElzoughariAnesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Abdelkarem Hussini Ismail AlsayedAnesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Management Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Asmaa AbdelbadieClinical Pharmacy Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Nahda University, Bani Suef, Egypt.
Rehab Abd El Fattah HelalAnesthesiology, Surgical Intensive Care and Pain Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit (ICU) experience significant distress, which triggers a stress response. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine and propofol in reducing stress levels, using salivary alpha-amylase (SAA) as a specific indicator of stress. Methods: A randomized, open-label trial was conducted involving 40 patients newly placed on MV. In a parallel study design, participants were randomly assigned into two equal groups (n = 20) through the sealed envelope method using computer-generated randomization. Group D received dexmedetomidine at a dosage of 0.2 to 1.4 μg/kg/h, while group P received propofol at a dosage of 0.3 to 4 mg/kg/h for sedation. Salivary alpha-amylase levels were measured according to the kit manufacturer's protocol. Results: Salivary alpha-amylase levels were significantly lower in group D than in group P at 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after the initiation of MV (P < 0.05). Heart rate and mean arterial pressure were also significantly lower in group D at 12, 18, and 24 hours (P < 0.05). The duration of MV was significantly shorter in group D compared to group P (4.4 ± 1.85 vs 6.1 ± 2.45 days, P = 0.018). There were no significant differences in ICU length of stay, mortality, or adverse events between the groups. Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine demonstrated superior stress-reducing effects compared to propofol in MV patients, as evidenced by lower SAA levels and improved hemodynamic stability. The shorter duration of MV in the dexmedetomidine group further suggests potential clinical benefits of its use in managing stress in MV patients.

Indexed as

DexmedetomidineMechanical VentilationPropofolSalivary Alpha-AmylaseStress

Identifiers

PMID40689106
PMCPMC12275634

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.