ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Safety Profile of 4,397 Consecutive Intravenous Sedations in Office-Based Esthetic Surgery: A Single-Center Retrospective Audit.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 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.
- Safety of Depth-Adjusted Intravenous Anesthesia in Office-Based Aesthetic Surgery: A One-Month Prospective Study of 135 Consecutive Cases.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Observational
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
backgroundIntravenous sedation (IVS) is widely used in office-based esthetic surgery, yet large-scale safety data from private clinics are scarce. This study quantified IVS utilization and evaluated perioperative safety in a high-volume Japanese cosmetic center.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted of all consecutive procedures performed under IVS between November 2020 and December 2024 at a single clinic. Eligibility was restricted to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I-II patients. Propofol was the first-line sedative; midazolam was substituted for documented egg or soy allergy. Standard monitoring (ECG, noninvasive blood pressure, SpO
conclusionsAmong 4,397 office-based esthetic procedures, IVS directed by non-anesthesiologist surgeons achieved a major complication rate of zero and a low incidence of minor events. Strict ASA I-II selection, continuous physiologic monitoring, and a weight-adjusted depth titration protocol can provide international-level safety in a private outpatient setting. Multicenter prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings and refine recovery benchmarks. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41291073What 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.