Trial reportBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
Comparison of the effect of adding midazolam versus fentanyl to intrathecal levobupivacaine in patients undergoing cesarean section: double-blind, randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06917898 (Fentanyl Versus Midazolam During Spinal Block With Bupivacaine for Elective Cesarean Delivery), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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.
Fentanyl Versus Midazolam During Spinal Block With Bupivacaine for Elective Cesarean Delivery: a Prospective Randomized Double-blind Clinical Trial.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of perioperative benzodiazepine administration on postoperative patient-reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of midazolam compared to fentanyl as adjuvants to hyperbaric bupivacaine in spinal anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany adjuvants are added to prolong the effects of spinal analgesia. We investigated the postoperative analgesic efficacy of the addition of midazolam or fentanyl to intrathecal levobupivacaine in women undergoing cesarean delivery.
methodsEighty patients were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 40). Group M received 10 mg of 0.5% levobupivacaine plus 2 mg of midazolam. Group F received 10 mg of 0.5% levobupivacaine plus 25 μg of fentanyl. Assessments included motor and sensory block, APGAR score, time to first request for analgesia, postoperative pain score, total consumption of rescue analgesics, and adverse effects.
resultsSensory blockade was prolonged in Group M compared with Group F (215.58 ± 27.94 vs. 199.43 ± 19.77 min; p = 0.004), with no differences in other characteristics of the spinal block in intraoperative hemodynamics or APGAR score. The mean time to first request for rescue analgesia was longer in Group M (351.45 ± 11.05 min) than in Group F (268.83 ± 10.35 min; p = 0.000). The median total consumption of rescue analgesics in the first 24 hours postoperatively was 30 mg in Group M vs. 60 mg in Group F (p = 0.003). The median Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores were lower in Group Ethan in Group F from the 8
conclusionIntrathecal midazolam (2 mg) was superior to intrathecal fentanyl (25 μg) in increasing the duration of the sensory blockade and postoperative analgesia with lower postoperative pain scores and decreasing the incidence of adverse effects.
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.