ArticleJournal of anesthesia2018
Spinal anesthesia for surgery longer than 60 min in infants: experience from the first 2 years of a spinal anesthesia program.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Dezocine on the Median Effective Dose of Sufentanil-Induced Respiratory Depression in Patients Undergoing Spinal Anesthesia Combined with Low-Dose Dexmedetomidine.Drug design, development and therapy · 2023Trial
- Safety of Intrathecal Clonidine as an Adjuvant to Spinal Anesthesia in Infants and Children.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2025Observational
- Review
- Manual Palpation versus Ultrasound to Identify the Intervertebral Space for Spinal Anesthesia in Infants.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Update on Local Anesthetic Toxicity, Prevention and Treatment During Regional Anesthesia in Infants and Children.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2021Review
- A Review of Regional Anesthesia in Infants.Paediatric drugs · 2019Review
- Hypothermia Following Spinal Anesthesia in an Infant: Potential Impact of Intravenous Dexmedetomidine and Intrathecal Clonidine.Journal of medical cases · 2019Article
- Regional Anesthesia Facilitates the Early Recognition of Local Anesthetic Toxicity.Journal of medical cases · 2019Article
- Spinal anesthesia in ASA III and IV physical status pediatric patients: A retrospective review.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSpinal anesthesia (SA) is being increasingly used in infants to avoid the potential negative neurocognitive effects of general anesthesia (GA). However, SA has been reported to provide a relatively short duration of surgical anesthesia.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed SA cases for surgical procedures lasting more than 60 min in children up to 3 years old. All patients received bupivacaine 0.5% (1 mg/kg up to 7 mg) with clonidine 1 µg/kg ± epinephrine. The primary outcome was success of SA without subsequent conversion to GA.
resultsThirty-five patients met inclusion criteria (all males, age 7 ± 5 months, weight 8 ± 2 kg). Procedures included male genital, groin and multiple site surgeries. Average surgical duration was 71 ± 12 min (range 60-111 min). SA was successful in 31 of 35 patients (89%; 95% confidence interval 78, 99%). The cause of failure was rarely due to the duration of surgery (1 of 4 patients). Six patients with successful SA required sedation with dexmedetomidine ± fentanyl. Differences in procedure duration and patient characteristics were not statistically significant between successful and failed SA.
conclusionsSA is a highly successful technique and may offer an alternative to GA in children undergoing appropriate surgery expected to last as long as 60-100 min.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29808260What 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.