Trial reportPharmacology research & perspectives2026
A Prospective Study of Marsh PK-PD Model and Schnider PK-PD Model During Anesthesia Induction for Obese Patients Undergoing Elective Heart Surgery.
Trial report in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This prospective study compared the Marsh and Schnider pharmacokinetic models for propofol target-controlled infusion (TCI) during anesthetic induction in obese patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. A total of 118 patients were randomly assigned to either the Marsh or Schnider group (n = 59 each). The primary outcome was the performance error (ΔC = measured minus predicted plasma concentration) during and after TCI. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model, anesthetic depth (BIS), cardiac function (LVEF, SV), electrocardiographic PK-PD model (QTc, QTcd), and recovery profiles. While no significant differences in ΔC were observed during TCI, the Marsh model demonstrated significantly lower ΔC at all time points after TCI cessation (p < 0.05). Compared to the Schnider group, the Marsh group also showed higher BIS values, better preserved LVEF and SV, shorter QTc/QTcd intervals, reduced propofol requirements, and shorter recovery times (all p < 0.05). In conclusion, under the conditions of this study, in which propofol TCI was configured using total body weight for the Marsh model and lean body weight for the Schnider model, the Marsh model provided more accurate plasma concentration control, better hemodynamic stability, and improved recovery profiles compared with the Schnider model for anesthetic induction in obese cardiac surgery patients.
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.