ArticleThe Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS2007
Evaluation of anaesthesia methods in caesarean section for foetal distress.
Article in The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS, 2007. 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.
- General versus regional anaesthesia for caesarean section indicated for acute foetal distress: a retrospective cohort study.BMC anesthesiology · 2021Article
- Spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section in pregnant women with fetal distress: time for reappraisal.International journal of biomedical science : IJBS · 2014Article
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
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the anaesthetic technique for Caesarean section which was appropriate for the clinical situation. This retrospective study was conducted on 240 patients undergoing Caesarean section with indications of foetal distress during a 3-year period (2002-2004). The data were reviewed from the patient's medical record of the Department of Anesthesiology, Dr Soetomo Hospital, Surabaya. The patients were divided into three groups, according to the criteria of foetal heart rates. The success of the anaesthesia methods was determined by assessing the Apgar scores of the newborn baby. The results were analyse using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-Square test. P ≤0.05 was considered as statistically significant. 1- and 5-minute Apgar score of the normal range group was significantly higher than that of the bradycardia group (p<0.05), but no significant differences was found between the normal range and the tachycardia group (p>0.05). One- and five- minute Apgar scores of the sub-arachnoid block group were significantly higher than those of the general anesthesia group (p<0.05). One-minute Apgar score of the ketamine group was significantly higher than that of the thiopental group (p<0.05), but no significant differences in 5-minute Apgar score was found between the ketamine and the thiopental groups (p>0.05). We conclude that subarachnoid block is the choice of anaesthesia for patients undergoing Caesarean section for foetal distress's diagnosed at PS 1 and 2 patients. General anaesthesia with ketamine Apgar score at one minute better than that of the thiopental.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22993490PMC3442625What 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.