ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2020
Dose Comparison of Dexmedetomidine Sedation following Spinal Anesthesia: Parturient versus Nonpregnant Women-A Randomized Trial.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02111421 (Optimal Dose of Dexmedetomidine Sedation Following Spinal Anesthesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Optimal Dose of Dexmedetomidine Sedation Following Spinal Anesthesia: Postpartum Versus Nonpregnant Women
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The 95% effective dose of dexmedetomidine to induce adequate sedation in patients with chronic insomnia disorder: a biased coin design up-and-down sequential allocation trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
- Comparison of the effect of dexmedetomidine and midazolam under spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial, single center study in South Korea.Anesthesia and pain medicine · 2023Article
- Intravenous Dexmedetomidine as an Adjunct to Neuraxial Anesthesia in Cesarean Delivery: A Retrospective Chart Review.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was designed to investigate and compare the effective doses of dexmedetomidine for sedation in parturient patients who underwent Cesarean section (CS) and nonpregnant women who underwent elective gynecologic surgery.
methodsThe study comprised 60 females aged between 25 and 35. They were divided into two groups. The parturient group received a bolus dose of dexmedetomidine over 15 min after the delivery of the fetus and placenta. In the nonpregnant women group, a bolus of dexmedetomidine was administered intravenously upon the completion of spinal anesthesia. The subsequent dose required by patients in each group was then determined through a modified two-stage Dixon up-and-down sequential method. Probit analysis was used to calculate the ED50 and the ED95 of dexmedetomidine for adequate sedation.
resultsThe ED50 of dexmedetomidine for adequate sedation in parturient patients was 1.58
conclusionThe ED50 of dexmedetomidine for target sedation in parturients who received spinal anesthesia for CS is greater than 1.5 times that in nonpregnant women who received spinal anesthesia for lower abdominal gynecologic surgery. This study postulates that the dose of dexmedetomidine required to achieve optimal sedation following spinal anesthesia is much higher in parturients than in nonpregnant women undergoing gynecologic surgeries. This trial is registered with NCT02111421.
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.