Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34772685›Full record

ArticleBMJ case reports2021

Integrating ultrasound with the combined spinal-epidural kit as a rescue technique during difficult spinal anaesthesia.

Phil Stagg

Open access · hybridAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ case reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 74% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Phil StaggAnaesthetics, Pindara Private Hospital, Benowa, Queensland, Australia philip.stagg@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5723-7776
Canossa Private Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conducting spinal anaesthesia in patients with elevated body mass index is commonly difficult, yet there are no guidelines to direct best practice. Landmark techniques are sometimes insufficient, leading to increased failure rates and suboptimal patient outcomes. Although ultrasound-guided techniques are now considered standard care for central venous access and regional anaesthesia, there has been relatively sparse uptake of this widely available resource for central neuraxial block, despite evidence of its efficacy.This article outlines a successful case of ultrasound-assisted spinal anaesthesia, after landmark techniques failed, in conjunction with a combined spinal-epidural kit. This unique combination of techniques has not been published as an amalgamated rescue strategy for difficult spinal anaesthesia. This article adds to current evidence by highlighting the potential benefits of combining these techniques into a novel approach either when difficulties are expected or as a rescue technique after failed landmark-based attempts.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, ConductionAnesthesia, EpiduralAnesthesia, SpinalEpidural SpaceHumansUltrasonographyanaesthesiaobesity (nutrition)orthopaedic and trauma surgerysleep disorders (respiratory medicine)ultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID34772685
PMCPMC8593699
OpenAlexW3214101807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.