ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2023
An explorative analysis of pharmacovigilance data of oxytocin and its analogue carbetocin, with a focus on haemodynamic adverse effects.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse Effects of Oxytocin Are More Prevalent than Those Associated with Carbetocin Administration During Cesarean Section.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Pharmacological Aspects in the Management of Children and Adolescents with Prader-Willi Syndrome.Paediatric drugs · 2025Review
- Global Burden of Vaccine-Associated Cerebrovascular Venous Sinus Thrombosis, 1968-2024: A Critical Analysis From the WHO Global Pharmacovigilance Database.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Oxytocin in neurodevelopmental disorders: Autism spectrum disorder and Prader-Willi syndrome.Pharmacology & therapeutics · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOxytocin and its analogue carbetocin are uterotonics whose prophylactic use is recommended to prevent postpartum haemorrhage, which is one of the leading causes of maternal deaths worldwide. However, both drugs can cause specific adverse effects and haemodynamic challenges.
aimThe aim of this work was to exploratively examine reports of adverse drug events of both drugs and to establish a comparative haemodynamic profile.
methodUsing data extracted from the World Health Organization's pharmacovigilance database VigiBase, a descriptive analysis was performed of all reports for oxytocin and carbetocin as a suspected or interacting drug followed by a disproportionality analysis for haemodynamic events. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) of carbetocin for hypertension, hypotension, tachycardia, and bradycardia were calculated, with oxytocin-related reports serving as comparators.
resultsOxytocin and carbetocin were mentioned as suspected or interacting drugs in 11,258 and 374 reports, respectively. Resulting RORs for carbetocin were 3.45 (95%CI: 1.72-6.92) for hypertension, 2.65 (1.64-4.28) for hypotension, 2.84 (1.79-4.49) for tachycardia, and 2.00 (0.87-4.60) for bradycardia, when compared to oxytocin. Of 231 patients for whom oxytocin-related tachycardia was reported, 2.6% died, and of 91 patients for whom bradycardia was reported, 2.2% died. No deaths were reported with carbetocin for any of the haemodynamic adverse events.
conclusionCompared to oxytocin, carbetocin showed an elevated reporting for adverse hypertension, hypotension, and tachycardia in pharmacovigilance data. Clinicians should be aware of their patients' individual susceptibility and the possibility of haemodynamic deterioration until causal inferences are possible.
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.