Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2026
Intravenous lidocaine reduces propofol requirements during endoscopic ultrasound: a randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePropofol as a sole sedative agent for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) often causes respiratory and circulatory depression. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of intravenous lidocaine on propofol dose, propofol-related complications, patient safety and comfort during EUS. PATIENTS AND
methodsEighty patients scheduled for EUS were randomly allocated to two groups. Lidocaine group (Group L, n = 40) received a 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine bolus followed by a 2 mg/kg/h infusion, while the control group (Group C, n = 40) received an equal volume of saline. Sedation was induced with 2 mg/kg propofol in both groups, followed by a continuous intravenous infusion of propofol at 4 mg/kg/h. 50 mg propofol was administered as needed, and the propofol infusion rate was also increased by 0.5 mg/kg/h. The primary outcome was total propofol dose.
resultsGroup L showed less total propofol dose (p = 0.007). In addition, maintenance (p = 0.018) and supplemental propofol doses (p = 0.016) were also reduced in Group L. Group L showed less incidence of intraoperative hypoxia, more stable hemodynamic profile, shorter induction and recovery times, reduced postoperative pain, higher patient and endoscopist satisfaction scores compared to Group C.
conclusionIntravenous lidocaine reduced total propofol dose during EUS. It also improved safety and procedural efficiency, although these findings should be interpreted with caution and require confirmation in larger studies.
trial registrationThe study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (ChiCTR2400086658) on 07/08/2024.
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.