ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2015
The effect of anesthesia method on serum level of pro-brain natriuretic Peptide in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery.
Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2015. 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.
- Salivary Substance P Levels During Cesarean Section Under Spinal versus General Anesthesia: A Prospective Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Pre-operative pulmonary evaluation in the patient with suspected respiratory disease.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical stress response is among the most severe stress tolerated by the patient, which needs suppression by anesthesia.
objectivesWe assessed the effect of three methods of anesthesia on postoperative levels of pro-brain natriuretic peptide (pro-BNP) to determine the most effective one in preventing surgical stress response. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn a randomized clinical trial, 120 patients who were 18 to 65 years old and met inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected and randomly allocated to three groups of 40:Group A, general anesthesia plus epidural catheter; Group B, general anesthesia and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia; and Group C, spinal anesthesia plus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia.
resultsThere was no difference between three groups for basic characteristics and variables and baseline pro-BNP levels; however, postoperative pro-BNP levels in Groups A, B, and C were respectively63.8 ± 10.1, 83.2 ± 12.3, and 51.5 ± 8.5 ng/L (ANOVA, P = 0.01).
conclusionsThe results of the current study suggested that spinal anesthesia plus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia have the most favorable cardiac effects regarding postoperative levels of pro-BNP.
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.