ArticleCureus2023
The Association of Anesthesia Type and Neonatal Outcomes Following Category-1 Cesarean Delivery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of general vs. neuraxial anesthesia on neonatal outcomes in non-elective cesarean sections.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Perinatal outcome of emergency cesarean section under neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia: a seven-year retrospective analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
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
Objectives Neuraxial anesthesia is the preferred anesthesia technique for cesarean delivery due to a decreased risk of adverse events. However, general anesthesia is often employed during emergent cesarean deliveries to achieve a shorter decision-to-delivery interval. The objective of this study was to determine if the conversion of epidural labor analgesia to surgical anesthesia for a category-1 cesarean delivery is associated with significant neonatal morbidity. Study design This was a retrospective cohort study of all intrapartum category-1 cesarean deliveries performed at an academic tertiary care institution between August 2016 and July 2021. The primary outcome was neonatal morbidity, defined as a composite of neonatal umbilical artery pH < 7.10 and/or 5-min Apgar score < 7, and/or neonatal intensive care unit admission. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to control for the presence of covariates and examine the degree to which they influenced the outcome. Results A total of 185 mother-neonate pairs qualified for inclusion, of which 23 had cesarean delivery under general anesthesia and 162 under epidural anesthesia. There was no significant difference in adverse neonatal outcomes between category-1 cesarean deliveries done under general anesthesia compared to epidural anesthesia (47% vs 35%, p = 0.3). The incidence of umbilical arterial pH < 7.10 was higher in the general anesthesia group compared to the epidural anesthesia group (35% vs 12%, p = 0.018). The multivariate regression model showed that gestational age (OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.51-0.75, p = <0.001) and non-reassuring fetal heart trace (OR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.05-0.58, p = 0.005) were significant predictors of adverse neonatal outcome. Conclusion Our results suggest that the conversion of epidural analgesia to surgical anesthesia for category-1 cesarean delivery in women with a functional labor epidural catheter is not associated with poorer neonatal outcomes.
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.