Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33481875›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

The extraperitoneal French AmbUlatory cesarean section technique leads to improved pain scores and a faster maternal autonomy compared with the intraperitoneal Misgav Ladach technique: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

Kaouther Dimassi, Ahmed Halouani, Amine Kammoun, Olivier Ami, Benedicte Simon, Luka Velemir, Denis Fauck, Amel Triki

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kaouther DimassiObstetrics and Gynecology Department, Mongi Slim University Hospital, La Marsa, Tunisia.ORCID 0000-0003-4090-6723
Ahmed HalouaniObstetrics and Gynecology Department, Mongi Slim University Hospital, La Marsa, Tunisia.
Amine KammounObstetrics and Gynecology Department, Mongi Slim University Hospital, La Marsa, Tunisia.
Olivier AmiRamsay Healthcare France, La Muette, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5216-7492
Benedicte SimonRamsay Healthcare France, Les Franciscaines, Versailles, France.
Luka VelemirLenval Foundation Polyclinique Santa Maria, Nice, France.
Denis FauckRamsay Healthcare France, Saint Lambert, La Garenne-Colombes, France.
Amel TrikiObstetrics and Gynecology Department, Mongi Slim University Hospital, La Marsa, Tunisia.
Hôpital Mongi Slim · TNGénérale de Santé · FRFondation Lenval · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether the French AmbUlatory Cesarean Section (FAUCS) technique reduces postoperative pain and promotes maternal autonomy compared with the Misgav Ladach cesarean section (MLCS) technique in elective conditions. STUDY

designOne hundred pregnant women were randomly, but in a non-blinded manner, assigned to undergo FAUCS or MLCS. The primary outcome was a postoperative mean pain score (PMPS), and secondary outcomes were a combined pain/medication score, time to regain autonomy, surgical duration, calculated blood loss, surgical complications, and neonatal outcome.

resultsWomen in the FAUCS group experienced less pain than those in the MLCS group (PMPS = 1.87 [1.04-2.41] vs. 2.93 [2.46-3.75], respectively; p < 0.001). Six hours after surgery, the combined pain/medication score for FAUCS patients was 33% lower than that for MLCS patients (p < 0.001). FAUCS patients more rapidly regained autonomy, with 94% reaching autonomy within 12 h vs. 4% of MLCS patients (p < 0.001). There were no differences in maternal surgical or neonatal complications between groups.

conclusionsOur results indicate that FAUCS can reduce postoperative pain and accelerate recovery, suggesting that this technique might be superior to MLCS and should be more widely used. One potentially key difference between FAUCS and MLCS is that MLCS includes 100 mcg spinal morphine anesthesia in addition to the same anesthesia used by FAUCS. Any interpretation of apparent differences must take the presence/absence of morphine into account.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionPostoperative PeriodAdultFemaleHumansPostoperative PainPregnancyProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID33481875
PMCPMC7822305
OpenAlexW3123048065

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.