ArticleBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
Anesthesia technique and postpartum hemorrhage: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Outcomes, Incidence, Associated Factors, and Prediction Model of Intensive Care Unit Admission in Women With Postpartum Hemorrhage Following Cesarean Delivery: A Secondary Analysis of a Tertiary-Care Cohort in Thailand.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2026Article
- Epidural analgesia and rate of cesarean section, maternal and neonatal outcomes: Retrospective study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Visual estimation of blood loss versus quantitative blood loss for maternal outcomes related to obstetrical hemorrhage.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2023Article
- How to identify a high-risk surgical patient?Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveDuring the past few years, an increased number of postpartum hemorrhages have been noticed, even in high-income countries. It has been suggested that this escalation could be associated with increased obstetric interventions. Among such interventions, anesthesia is one of the most prevalent. The present study aimed to investigate the influence of peripartum anesthesia on total blood loss during the 24 hours after delivery.
methodsWe performed a complementary analysis from a prospective cohort study that evaluated postpartum bleeding within 24 hours after birth. The study was performed between February 1
resultsWe included 270 women in the study; of these, 168 received anesthesia for delivery and almost 50% of them had spinal and epidural anesthesia. The mean blood loss within 24 hours after delivery did not show differences between those who did and those who did not receive obstetrical anesthesia (579.0 ± 361.6 vs. 556.6 ± 360.6; p = 0.57). Logistic regression showed that anesthesia, the type of anesthesia, and the drug used did not influence the PPH above 500 mL and above 1000 mL within 2 hours (p > 0.05).
conclusionAnesthesia did not influence postpartum bleeding after vaginal delivery.
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.