Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2023
Effect of height versus height/weight-based spinal bupivacaine on maternal hemodynamics for elective cesarean in short stature patients: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04082676 (Effect of Height Versus Height and Weight Based Intrathecal Bupivacaine Dose on Maternal Haemodynamics for Elective Caesarean Section in Short Stature Patients), which is not on this 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.
Effect of Height Versus Height and Weight Based Intrathecal Bupivacaine Dose on Maternal Haemodynamics for Elective Caesarean Section in Short Stature Patients: A Randomized Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low-dose spinal anesthesia in cesarean section: a narrative review.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Review
- Spinal anesthetic dose following removal of an indwelling labor epidural catheter for patients who underwent unscheduled intrapartum cesarean delivery stratified by height and weight: a single-center retrospective study.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDoses of spinal bupivacaine adjusted to patient height or height/weight have been shown to provide hemodynamic stability during cesarean section. However, their effects in short stature parturients are unknown.
methodsIn this double-blind, randomized clinical trial, we randomly assigned short parturients (height < 150 cm) undergoing elective cesarean section, to receive doses of intrathecal hyperbaric bupivacaine either height or height/weight-adjusted, in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was post-spinal hypotension (defined as systolic blood pressure [SBP] < 90% of baseline between spinal administration and delivery of the baby). Secondary outcomes included severe post-spinal hypotension (SBP < 80% of baseline), post-delivery hypotension (SBP < 90% and < 80% of baseline), intraoperative bradycardia, nausea and vomiting, shivering, rescue analgesic needed, and spinal block characteristics.
resultsA total of 112 patients underwent randomization. Post-spinal hypotension (SBP < 90% of baseline) occurred in 52% of the patients in the height/weight group and in 55% in the height group (difference - 3.5%: 95% confidence interval [CI] - 22 to 14.8, P = 0.705). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the occurrences of post-spinal severe hypotension (SBP < 80% of baseline), post-delivery hypotension, and spinal block characteristics. Six patients (11%) in the height/weight group needed intraoperative rescue analgesic compared to none in the height group (P = 0.027).
conclusionWe found that height-based dosing in short parturients provides the optimal trade-off between intraoperative hemodynamic instability and provision of pain-free anesthesia.
trial registrationclinicaltrial.gov-NCT04082676. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04082676 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
37709952What 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.