Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16856089›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Routine prophylactic drugs in normal labour for reducing gastric aspiration and its effects.

G M L Gyte, Y Richens

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Restricting oral fluid and food intake during labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Restricting oral fluid and food intake during labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G M L GyteUniversity of Liverpool, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, Division of Perinatal and Reproductive Medicine, First Floor, Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust, Crown Street, Liverpool, UK L8 7SS. ggyte@cochrane.co.uk
Y Richens
Cochrane · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen in normal labour may sometimes go on to have general anaesthesia if labour becomes abnormal, for example if a caesarean section is required. General anaesthesia carries a very small risk of regurgitation and inhalation of stomach contents into the lungs. This can cause inflammation, particularly if the fluid is acidic, and can lead to severe morbidity and very occasionally mortality. Labour hormones increase the risk of gastric aspiration or Mendelsohn's syndrome, though the exact incidence is unknown. The routine administration of acid prophylaxis drugs to all women in normal labour is commonly practiced worldwide, to reduce gastric aspiration by reducing the volume and acidity of stomach contents.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of routine prophylaxis drugs for women in normal labour to reduce gastric aspiration and its effects. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (December 2005), EMBASE (1974 to April 2005) and CINAHL (1982 to April 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of women in normal labour assessing the routine administration of drugs (antacids, H(2) receptor antagonists, dopamine antagonists and proton-pump inhibitors) compared with placebo/no treatment, and compared with other drugs for reducing gastric aspiration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed eligibility, quality, extracted data and performed double-data entry. MAIN

resultsThree trials were included, involving 2465 women, assessing the effects of antacids, H(2) receptor antagonists and dopamine antagonists. There were no trials on proton-pump inhibitors. None of the trials were of good quality, and none assessed the incidence of gastric aspiration, Mendelsohn's syndrome or their consequences. All the studies assessed vomiting, and there was limited evidence that vomiting may be reduced by antacids (relative risk (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.77, n = 578, one trial) or by dopamine antagonists given alongside pethidine (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.68, n = 584, one trial). Comparisons between different drugs showed no significant differences, though the number of participants was small. There was no evidence that H(2) receptor antagonists improved outcomes compared with antacids, though only one trial addressed this issue. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is no good evidence to support the routine administration of acid prophylaxis drugs in normal labour to prevent gastric aspiration and its consequences. Giving such drugs to women once a decision to give general anaesthesia is made, is assessed in another Cochrane review.

Indexed as

Labor, ObstetricAntacidsAntiemeticsFemaleHistamine H2 AntagonistsHumansObstetric Labor ComplicationsPneumonia, AspirationPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVomitingAntacidsAntiemeticsHistamine H2 Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID16856089
PMCPMC6885064
OpenAlexW2100156550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.