ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2013
The comparison of spinal anesthesia with general anesthesia on the postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements after elective lower abdominal surgery: A randomized, double-blinded study.
Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of postoperative pulmonary functions and outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal surgeries between general anaesthesia with thoracic epidural and thoracic continuous spinal anaesthesia: An exploratory randomised study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Review
- A Retrospective Cohort Study on the Side Effects of Intrathecal Morphine Administration Combined with General Anaesthesia Versus General Anaesthesia Alone in Prostatectomy Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- The Effect of Anesthesia Type on the Stability of the Surgical View on the Monitor in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Stone: A Prospective Observational Trial.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Observational
- Comparison of the effects of spinal anesthesia, paracervical block and general anesthesia on pain, nausea and vomiting, and analgesic requirements in diagnostic hysteroscopy: A non-randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The Effect of Spinal and General Anesthesia on Serum Lipid Peroxides and Total Antioxidant Capacity in Diabetic Patients with Lower Limb Amputation Surgery.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2018Article
- Hepatic resection is associated with reduced postoperative opioid requirement.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the postoperative pain scores and morphine requirements between spinal anesthesia (SA) with hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% and general anesthesia (GA) with 1 Minimal alveolar concentration minimal alveolar concentration (MAC) of isoflurane in 50% N2O and O2 after elective lower abdominal surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this randomized clinical trial, 68 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I or II undergoing lower abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to have elective lower abdominal surgery under SA (n = 34) or GA (n = 34). The SA group received 3 cc of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg), at L3-L4 interspace intrathecally and also 2 mic/kg fentanyl and 0.15 mg/kg morphine intravenously for intraoperative analgesia. In the GA group, induction of anesthesia was carried out with Na thiopental 6 mg/kg body weight, fentanyl 2 mic/kg body weight, morphine 0.15 mg/kg, and atracurium 0.6 mg/kg body weight, and then, trachea was intubated. The primary outcome was postoperative pain scores at rest and under stress on a visual analog scale and the secondary outcome was morphine requirement by the patients. Outcome measures were recorded at 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively. The duration of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and hospital stay were recorded. Intraoperative parameters, postoperative pain scores, complications, recovery time, and the duration of hospital stay at follow up were compared between the two groups.
resultsPatients in SA group had significantly lower scores of a postoperative pain at rest (3.4 ± 1.6 and 4.1 ± 1.2 at 2 and 4 h postoperatively vs. 5.2 ± 1.5 and 5.8 ± 0.9 in the GA group with P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences between both groups for scores of postoperative pain at 6, 12, and 24 h. The amount of morphine requirement in 6 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the SA group (10.2 ± 4.3 mg vs. 15.6 ± 5.6 mg in the GA group with P < 0.05), but there were not significant differences between the two groups after 6 h postoperatively. The duration of PACU stay was shorter for the GA group than the SA group (75 ± 6 vs. 126 ± 12 min, P < 0.001), but there was no significant differences between the duration of hospital stay between the two groups (1.8 ± 0.6 vs. 2.1 ± 0.8 days).
conclusionAlthough in patients undergoing elective lower abdominal surgery with SA may have lower pain scores and also lower morphine requirement in the first 6 h postoperatively, but after that there were no significant differences between SA and GA regarding postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements and so more attention should be given to their postoperation pain relief.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24516483PMC3897018What 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.