Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
0.75% ropivacaine may be a suitable drug in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Determination the ED90s of Different Concentrations of Initial Ropivacaine Volume for Labor Analgesia with Dural Puncture Epidural: A Randomized Sequential Allocation Study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background3% chloroprocaine (CP) has been reported as the common local anesthetic used in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period. However, 0.75% ropivacaine is considered a promising and effective alternative. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness and safety of 0.75% ropivacaine with 3% chloroprocaine for extended epidural anesthesia in pregnant women.
methodsWe conducted a double-blind, randomized, controlled, single-center study from November 1, 2022, to April 30, 2023. We selected forty-five pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period and randomized them to receive either 0.75% ropivacaine or 3% chloroprocaine in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the time to loss of cold sensation at the T4 level.
resultsThere was a significant difference between the two groups in the time to achieve loss of cold sensation (303, 95%CI 255 to 402 S vs. 372, 95%CI 297 to 630 S, p = 0.024). There was no significant difference the degree of motor block (p = 0.185) at the Th4 level. Fewer pregnant women required additional local anesthetics in the ropivacaine group compared to the chloroprocaine group (4.5% VS. 34.8%, p = 0.011). The ropivacaine group had lower intraoperative VAS scores (p = 0.023) and higher patient satisfaction scores (p = 0.040) than the chloroprocaine group. The incidence of intraoperative complications was similar between the two groups, and no serious complications were observed.
conclusionsOur study found that 0.75% ropivacaine was associated with less intraoperative pain treatment, higher patient satisfaction and reduced the onset time compared to 3% chloroprocaine in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period. Therefore, 0.75% ropivacaine may be a suitable drug in pregnant women undergoing urgent cesarean delivery during labor analgesia period. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY URL: The registration number: ChiCTR2200065201; http://www.chictr.org.cn , Principal investigator: MEN, Date of registration: 31/10/2022.
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.