ArticleAnesthesiology and pain medicine2023
Optimized Method of Unilateral Spinal Anesthesia: A Double-blind, Randomized Clinical Study.
Article in Anesthesiology and pain medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hypotension after unilateral versus bilateral spinal anaesthesia: A Systematic review with meta-analysis.European journal of anaesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Unilateral spinal anesthesia is often accompanied by technical difficulties in implementation, multiple puncture attempts, unsuccessful punctures, and, as a result, insufficient anesthesia, along with various complications associated with a dural puncture. Objectives: This work compares the efficacy and safety of conventional Unilateral Spinal Anesthesia (USpA) and unilateral spinal anesthesia with electrical nerve stimulation (USpA+ENS). Methods: A total of 134 patients with an upcoming vascular surgery on one lower extremity were randomly assigned to two groups. All the patients were positioned with the operated limb below and used 7.5 mg of Bupivacaine-Spinal®. In the UsPA group, anesthesia was performed according to the standard technique. In the USpA+ENS group, electrical nerve stimulation was additionally used. Primary outcomes were the presence or absence of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH), number of puncture attempts, lateralization, and anesthesia adequacy. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative pain scores, the presence or absence of nausea and vomiting, and the need for hemodynamics correction. Results: The frequency of puncture complications was sufficiently lower in the USpA+ENS group than in the UsPA group. The local anesthetic solution distribution, pain score indicators, and secondary outcomes were comparable in both groups with a slight difference. Conclusions: We showed that USpA+ENS reduces the incidence of puncture complications and improves the quality of anesthesia and adherence of both patients and anesthesiologists to the unilateral spinal anesthesia technique.
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.