Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025
Dexmedetomidine-dezocine versus propofol-remifentanil anesthesia for ultrasound-guided transvaginal oocyte retrieval: a randomized controlled trial.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTransvaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte retrieval, a core component of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) techniques, is an outpatient procedure that requires rapid awakening while ensuring adequate analgesia. The currently widely used regimen of propofol-remifentanil presents limitations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine-dezocine in transvaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte retrieval.
methodsA single-center prospective randomized controlled trial included 124 patients randomly divided into Group D (dexmedetomidine-dezocine, n = 62), and Group P (propofol-remifentanil, n = 62). The primary outcome measure was time to complete wakefulness (time from drug withdrawal to OAA/S score ≥ 4). Secondary outcome measures included intraoperative body movement scale, Ramsay sedation scale, hemodynamic parameters, and adverse reactions.
resultsThere were no statistical differences between the two groups in intraoperative limb movement grading (p = 0.12), operator satisfaction score (4.65 ± 0.78 vs. 4.55 ± 0.72, p = 0.3348), and patient satisfaction (7.39 vs. 7.10, p = 0.407). Group D had higher oxygen saturation than Group P (97.8% vs. 96.3%, p = 0.002) and a more stable respiratory rate (14.8 ± 2.3 vs. 13.0 ± 2.6, p < 0.001). Group D also had a shorter time to complete wakefulness than Group P (15.02 vs. 15.87 min, minutes, p = 0.019) and a higher Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) score at the end of the procedure (2.06 vs. 1.64, p = 0.011). Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.88 and p = 0.93, respectively). The incidence of major adverse events was similar between groups. However, this study did not assess embryo quality or pregnancy outcomes, which represents a limitation.
conclusionsThis exploratory study suggests that dexmedetomidine-dezocine regimens may represent a potential anesthetic option for transvaginal oocyte retrieval. However, further research is needed to validate these findings.
trial registration(TCTR20240601001) [Registered on: 01/06/2024]. This trial is registered with the Thailand Clinical Trials Registry https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/ .
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.