ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Comparison of three neuraxial anesthesia approaches in parturient women with obesity and pregnancy-induced hypertension who underwent cesarean section.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intraoperative hemodynamics and anesthetic implications in superobese parturients undergoing cesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of different approaches of neuraxial anesthesia in parturient women with obesity and pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) who undergo cesarean section (CS).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from 108 parturient women with obesity and PIH who underwent CS. All women were divided into the following three groups according to the neuraxial anesthesia approach: spinal anesthesia (SA), epidural anesthesia (EA), and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE). Clinical variables were compared.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 27.3 ± 2.2 years. Women in the CSE group had a longer duration from puncture to surgery, smaller intraoperative change in mean arterial pressure, higher Apgar scores at 1 and 5 minutes, shorter surgery time, lower rates of nausea and vomiting, and lower rate of intraoperative hypotension compared with those in the SA and EA groups.
conclusionCSE takes longer to administer in parturient women with obesity and PIH who undergo CS compared with those who have SA or EA. However, CSE has several advantages over SA or EA, including a shorter surgery time, more stable intraoperative mean arterial pressure, lower rates of nausea, vomiting, and intraoperative hypotension, and better Apgar scores at 1 and 5 minutes.
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.