Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2022
Comparison of Prophylactic Norepinephrine and Phenylephrine Infusions During Spinal Anaesthesia for Primary Caesarean Delivery in Twin Pregnancies: A Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Study.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Norepinephrine vs. phenylephrine for spinal hypotension in cesarean section: a network meta-analysis.Journal of anesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of prophylactic norepinephrine and phenylephrine in spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Vasopressor Regimens and Maternal Core Temperature During Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized, Double‑blind, Non‑inferiority Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Anesthetic approaches for malpresentation and multiple gestation.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2026Review
- In reply to the comments by Onitsuka et al.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Neonatal outcome following norepinephrine versus phenylephrine for treatment of spinal-induced hypotension among women undergoing caesarean section: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Review
- Comparison of Two Different Norepinephrine Bolus Doses for Management of Spinal Anesthesia-Induced Maternal Hypotension in Cesarean Section: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Effect of prophylactic phenylephrine versus norepinephrine on foeto-maternal outcomes in caesarean delivery under neuraxial anaesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- A Comparison of Norepinephrine versus Phenylephrine to Prevent Hypotension after Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Section: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Norepinephrine has been associated with improved heart rate (HR) and cardiac output (CO) compared to phenylephrine as a treatment for post-spinal hypotension during caesarean delivery (CD) in singleton pregnancies. Our current study compared the effects of norepinephrine and phenylephrine in maintaining maternal hemodynamics after spinal anaesthesia in twin pregnancies during elective CD. Methods: This was a double-blinded, randomized, controlled study. From December 2017 to December 2018, 62 women with healthy twin term pregnancies undergoing elective CD under spinal anaesthesia were studied. Following spinal induction, either norepinephrine (6 μg/mL) or phenylepinephrine (75 μg/mL) was infused at 60 mL/h to maintain systolic blood pressure (SBP) near baseline until delivery. HR, SBP, systemic vascular resistance (SVR), and CO were collected using anaesthesia monitors and continuous-pulse waveform analysis. The primary outcome was maternal CO. Other parameters of maternal hemodynamics, umbilical cord blood gases, and adverse events were also compared. Results: Hemodynamic variables (CO, SBP, HR, and SVR) between spinal anaesthesia induction to skin incision were similar between the two groups ( Conclusion: When administered as a prophylactic fixed-rate infusion, phenylephrine and norepinephrine are both capable of maintaining maternal blood pressure following spinal anaesthesia in twin pregnancies. There were no differences in the maternal hemodynamics or foetal outcomes between women receiving norepinephrine and phenylephrine. Previous Presentations: Presented at the 51st Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology Annual Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, May 1-5, 2019. Clinical Trial Number and Registry: No. ChiCTR-IOR-17013358.
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.