Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35918857›Full record

ReviewAnesthesia and pain medicine2022

General anesthesia for cesarean section: are we doing it well?

Sung Uk Choi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Anesthesia and pain medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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.

Sung Uk ChoiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Korea has a higher rate of cesarean sections under general anesthesia than in other countries. Neuraxial anesthesia is the gold standard for a cesarean section, but there are some cases in which general anesthesia is inevitable. Therefore, obstetric anesthesiologists should be familiar in performing general anesthesia for cesarean section. Rapid-sequence induction and intubation with cricoid pressure using thiopental-succinylcholine have been the standard for cesarean section under general anesthesia for a long time. Recently, with the introduction of new drugs (propofol, rocuronium, and sugammadex) and equipments (videolaryngoscopy and supraglottic airways), anesthesia methods have also gradually changed. Pursuing the safety of obstetric patients and anesthesiologists at the same time, this review will help update the knowledge or training in performing general anesthesia for cesarean section.

Indexed as

Cesarean sectionGeneral anesthesiaObstetricsRapid sequence induction

Identifiers

PMID35918857
PMCPMC9346210

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.