ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2023
Comparing the Effect of Dexmedetomidine Versus Intravenous Lidocaine on Colonoscopy Candidates Under Sedation with Propofol-Fentanyl: A Clinical Trial.
Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2023. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Colonoscopy is an invasive and short-term diagnostic-therapeutic method that is associated with significant pain, discomfort, and anxiety in patients. Thus, various sedation and analgesia methods are used to reduce these complications. Objectives: This study compared the effect of dexmedetomidine versus intravenous lidocaine on colonoscopy candidates under sedation with propofol-fentanyl. Methods: This double-blind clinical trial was conducted on two groups of randomly divided patients (n = 60 each) referring to the colonoscopy unit of Imam Khomeini Hospital in Ahvaz, Iran. The first group was given 2% intravenous lidocaine with an initial dose of 1.5 mg/kg and a maintenance dose of 1 mg/kg/h, plus propofol 0.5 mg/kg and 1 µg/kg fentanyl. In contrast, the second group was given dexmedetomidine with an initial dose of 1 µg/kg and a maintenance dose of 0.5 µg/kg/h plus 0.5 mg/kg propofol and 1 µg/kg fentanyl. Hemodynamic changes, degree of sedation, and patients' pain were measured and recorded at certain intervals. Results: No significant differences were observed between the dexmedetomidine and lidocaine groups regarding gender, age, and weight (P > 0.05), and the two groups were homogeneous in this regard. The two groups were significantly different with respect to their heart rate after sedation (from 5 to 20 minutes) (P < 0.05), which was lower in the group receiving dexmedetomidine. In terms of mean arterial blood pressure, no significant difference was found between the dexmedetomidine and lidocaine groups (P > 0.05). With respect to the pain score at the end of the procedure, the two groups were significantly different (P < 0.05), with the group receiving dexmedetomidine obtaining a lower score. Conclusions: Although the use of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine is associated with the least hemodynamic changes, dexmedetomidine can create more suitable and favorable conditions during and after colonoscopy by inducing a higher degree of sedation and more analgesia.
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.