Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40727636›Full record

ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2025

The Effect of Esmolol Versus Dexmedetomidine on Postoperative Pain Control in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Randomized Trial.

Amany Faheem Omara, Alaa Mohammed Abo Hagar, Asmaa Fawzy Amer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
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.

Amany Faheem OmaraDepartment of Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9025-632X
Alaa Mohammed Abo HagarLecturer of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Al Gharbia governate, Tanta, Egypt.
Asmaa Fawzy AmerDepartment of Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1956-9144

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) is the cornerstone of treatment for nasal pathology. Objectives: This randomized study compares the ability of preoperative and intraoperative esmolol and dexmedetomidine to induce postoperative analgesia and sedation. Methods: Seventy ASA I and II patients, of either sex, scheduled for FESS, were divided into two groups: The esmolol group (group E) received an intravenous bolus dose of 0.5 mg/kg prior to the induction of anesthesia, followed by 0.05 mg/kg/min and stopped immediately upon extubation, while the dexmedetomidine group (group D) received 1 µg/kg of dexmedetomidine over 10 minutes, immediately before the induction of anesthesia, followed by a 0.5 µg/kg/hour infusion after induction and stopped immediately upon extubation. Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were monitored before induction, before and after intubation, and then every 5 to 30 minutes, as well as every 10 minutes until 90 minutes following the commencement of the IV medication infusion. The sedation level was assessed using the Ramsay sedation scale at 15, 30, and 60 minutes postoperatively. Pain scores were evaluated in the recovery room (on arrival and then 15 minutes, 30 minutes, and 1 hour later) and at 2 hours, 6 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours. The length of the procedure, the degree of bleeding during the intervention, and the occurrence of any adverse effects were documented. Categorical data were summarized as counts and percentages and compared by the chi-square test. Continuous data were assessed for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Student's Results: According to our findings, both esmolol and dexmedetomidine were safe and beneficial in reducing blood loss during FESS, promoting optimal surgical field quality, and improving surgical field visibility. Dexmedetomidine was far more effective in providing postoperative sedation, reducing the need for opioids, and delaying the initial need for postoperative analgesia. Conclusions: It was discovered that esmolol and dexmedetomidine both provided superior surgical field, less nasal hemorrhage, and more successful results. Dexmedetomidine caused effective sedation and a reduced need for analgesics.

Indexed as

DexmedetomidineEsmololFESSPostoperative Pain

Identifiers

PMID40727636
PMCPMC12297030

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.