Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41372755›Full record

Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2025

How are cognitive functions affected by different sedation methods in geriatric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography patients?

Filiz Kaya, Esra Özayar, Ayça Tuba Dumanlı Özcan, Mehmet Uçar, Levent Öztürk

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06719960 (How Are Cognitive Functions Affected by Different Sedation Methods in Geriatric Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Patients?), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT06719960 completednot on this map

How Are Cognitive Functions Affected by Different Sedation Methods in Geriatric Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Patients?

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorAnkara City Hospital BilkentRan2023 to 2024Enrolled184ConditionsCognition, Sedation for Gastroenteric Endoscopic Procedure, Geriatric PatientsArmsDexmedetomidine group, Propofol group
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Filiz KayaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. filiz.kaya17@saglik.gov.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2006-4832
Esra ÖzayarDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1309-9279
Ayça Tuba Dumanlı ÖzcanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9881-8534
Mehmet UçarDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-4281-4615
Levent ÖztürkDepartment of Anesthesiology, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9755-033X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVarious sedation methods are used during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures, which are increasingly performed in elderly patients. Our study aimed to compare the effects of propofol anesthesia with a propofol-dexmedetomidine combination on cognitive function in elderly patients undergoing ERCP.

methodsThis prospective observational study included 184 inpatients aged 65 years and older who received either propofol or a propofol-dexmedetomidine combination for sedation during ERCP. Cognitive function was assessed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) at three time points: before the procedure and at 2 and 24 h after the procedure. The degree of frailty in patients was assessed via a frailty questionnaire. In the propofol (P) group, the propofol loading dose was 0.2–0.5 mg/kg, with a maintenance infusion dose of 0.5-4 mg/kg/h. In the propofol + dexmedetomidine (P + D) group, in addition to propofol infusion at the same doses, a loading dose of 0.5 µg/kg dexmedetomidine was administered over 10 min, followed by an infusion at a dose of 0.2–0.7 µg/kg/h.

resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between the P and P + D groups in terms of the MMSE score before the procedure (p > 0.05). However, in the P + D group, a significant improvement in the MMSE score was observed at both 2 h (z = 2.943, p = 0.003) and 24 h (z = 2.816, p = 0.005) after the procedure. The increase in MMSE scores was significantly greater in the P + D group, particularly among pre-frail patients.

conclusionOur study demonstrated that dexmedetomidine yielded more favorable results in terms of cognitive function than propofol following ERCP in geriatric patients. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT06719960. Retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeCognitionDexmedetomidineHypnotics and SedativesPropofolAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGeriatric AnesthesiaHumansMaleProspective StudiesDexmedetomidineHypnotics and SedativesPropofolCholangiopancreatographyCognitive dysfunctionDexmedetomidineEndoscopic retrogradeFrailtyGeriatric anesthesiaPropofol

Identifiers

PMID41372755
PMCPMC12801831

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.