ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
Hemodynamic effects of low-dose bupivacaine spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low-dose spinal anesthesia in cesarean section: a narrative review.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Review
- Assessing Hemodynamic Changes During Locoregional Anesthesia in Cesarean Section: The Role of USCOMDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Predictive factors of epidural rescue in combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery.Pain management · 2025Article
- Low dose and the conventional dose of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine produce comparable outcomes in the lower segment caesarean section. An observational study.Annals of African medicineObservational
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpinal anesthesia is the most common technique for cesarean section. The conventional local anesthetic dose has been decreasing over time to 8-12.5 mg of bupivacaine. Lower doses of bupivacaine may be associated with reduced incidence of hypotension and other complications. This low dose also may be associated with improved maternal cardiac index (CI). We hypothesized that low dose spinal anesthesia using 4.5 mg bupivacaine would result in improved maternal CI when compared with conventional dose (9 mg) intrathecal bupivacaine.
methodsThis randomized controlled trial included all healthy parturients presenting for elective cesarean section. In addition to standard monitors, an arterial line was placed for pulse contour cardiac output measurement. Due to limited data on maternal cardiac output during cesarean section, we had to power our study on recovery room length of stay. Secondary outcomes included the change in maternal CI, fluid administration, vasopressor usage, maternal satisfaction, and adequacy of surgical blockade and recovery time from motor and sensory blockade.
resultsThe low dose group had significantly faster motor recovery times (132 [122-144] versus. 54 [48-66] min conventional versus. low-dose, respectively,
conclusionsLow-dose spinal anesthesia provides adequate surgical anesthesia, improved recovery time, but no difference in maternal cardiac index when compared to conventional dose spinal anesthesia.
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.