Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27525282›Full record

SynthesisBioMed research international2016

Comparison of Postoperative Events between Spinal Anesthesia and General Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Xian-Xue Wang, Quan Zhou, Dao-Bo Pan, Hui-Wei Deng, Ai-Guo Zhou, Hua-Jing Guo, Fu-Rong Huang

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Economic Considerations of Acute Pain Medicine Programs.Techniques in orthopaedics (Rockville, Md.) · 2017
    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

7 authors.

Xian-Xue WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.
Quan ZhouScience & Education Division, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.
Dao-Bo PanDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1969-7349
Hui-Wei DengDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.
Ai-Guo ZhouDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.
Hua-Jing GuoDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.
Fu-Rong HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde, Hunan 415003, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is usually carried out under general anesthesia. There were a few studies which have found spinal anesthesia as a safe alternative. We aimed to evaluate the postoperative events between spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (from inception to January 2016) for eligible studies. The primary outcome was the visual analogue scale score. Secondary outcomes included postoperative nausea and vomiting and urine retention 24 hours postoperatively. We calculated pooled risk ratios and 95% confidence interval using random- or fixed-effects models. Results. Eight trials involving 723 patients were listed. Meta-analysis showed that patients in spinal anesthesia groups have lower visual analogue scale score 24 hours postoperatively. There were significant decreases in the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in spinal anesthesia group when compared with general anesthesia group (odds ratios: 0.38, 95% confidence interval: 0.19-0.76; P = 0.006) with heterogeneity accepted (I (2) = 13%; P = 0.33), while urine retention rate was increased in patients with spinal anesthesia (odds ratios: 4.95, 95% confidence interval: 1.24-19.71; P = 0.02) without any heterogeneity (I (2) = 0%; P = 0.98). Conclusions. Spinal anesthesia may be associated with less postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with general anesthesia.

Indexed as

AdultAge DistributionAnesthesia, GeneralAnesthesia, SpinalCausalityCholecystectomy, LaparoscopicComorbidityFemaleGallbladder DiseasesHumansMalePostoperative Nausea and VomitingPostoperative PainRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsSex Distribution

Identifiers

PMID27525282
PMCPMC4976158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.