ArticleDrug design, development and therapy2025
Remifentanil-Propofol versus Propofol Alone in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study on Anesthesia Outcomes.
Article in Drug design, development and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodological Considerations on the Retrospective Cohort Study of Remifentanil-Propofol versus Propofol Alone in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury [Letter].Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Analysis of clinical efficacy of remifentanil combined with propofol anesthesia in patients with traumatic brain injury.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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
Objective: To compare the effects of remifentanil-propofol versus propofol alone on anesthesia outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods: In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the data of 113 consecutive severe TBI (GCS <9) patients who underwent emergency neurosurgery. Patients were allocated into two groups based on the anesthesia maintenance regimen: the control group (n=56) received a continuous infusion of propofol alone, while the observation group (n=57) received a combination of remifentanil and propofol. The groups were well-matched at baseline. We compared anesthesia recovery times, hemodynamic parameters (SpO Results: Compared to the control group, the observation group demonstrated significantly shorter extubation time (13.54 ± 3.23 vs 24.79 ± 5.71 min, P < 0.001) and awakening time (8.72 ± 2.43 vs 17.21 ± 3.96 min, P < 0.001). The remifentanil-propofol regimen was associated with superior intraoperative hemodynamic stability for MAP and HR (Group and Interaction effects, P < 0.05). At 24 hours postoperatively, the observation group also exhibited lower VAS and RSAS scores (both P < 0.05), as well as reduced elevations in TNF-α, IL-6, S-100β, and NSE levels (all P < 0.05). Critically, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the observation group achieved a "Good Recovery" on the GOS at 3 months (54.39% vs 25.00%, P = 0.001). Conclusion: For severe TBI surgery, remifentanil-propofol is associated with faster emergence, better hemodynamic control, reduced pain/agitation, attenuated neuro-inflammation, and improved long-term recovery versus propofol alone, suggesting significant clinical benefits. Prospective studies are warranted for confirmation.
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.