SynthesisEuropean journal of anaesthesiology2025
Hypotension after unilateral versus bilateral spinal anaesthesia: A Systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of anaesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06972485 (Comparison of Hemodynamic Effects of Hypobaric and Hyperbaric Bupivacaine in Spinal Anesthesia During Hip Surgery in Geriatric Patients), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of Hemodynamic Effects of Hypobaric and Hyperbaric Bupivacaine in Spinal Anesthesia During Hip Surgery in Geriatric Patients
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Different local anesthetic volumes for unilateral spinal anesthesia in varicose vein surgery prospective randomized clinical trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block as a Main Anesthetic Technique versus Spinal Anesthesia Combined with PENG Block for Urgent Intertrochanteric Fracture Surgery in Elderly Patients: Preliminary Results from a Multicenter Pilot Study.Local and regional anesthesia · 2026Article
- Perfusion index as a predictor of hypotension after spinal anesthesia in lower extremity orthopedic surgery: a prospective observational trial.BMC surgery · 2025Observational
- EDFrontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpinal anaesthesia is frequently used in surgical procedures involving the lower abdomen and extremities, however, the occurrence of hypotension remains a common and clinically important adverse effect. Unilateral spinal anaesthesia seems to be a promising approach to minimise this complication but the effectiveness of this remains controversial.
objectiveA meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate the superiority of unilateral spinal anaesthesia over bilateral spinal anaesthesia with regard to the incidence of hypotension and other complications.
designSystematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DATE SOURCES: PUBMED, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from their inception to 5 March 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unilateral spinal anaesthesia with bilateral spinal anaesthesia were eligible for inclusion. Observational studies, case reports, case series, and studies not conducted in humans were excluded. The incidence of hypotension, vasopressor requirement, and other complications were compared. Heterogeneity was assessed by subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis.
resultsTwenty-one trials involving 1358 patients undergoing unilateral lower extremity surgery or lower abdominal surgery were included in the meta-analysis. Hyperbaric solutions were used in most trials. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effect model was used for the analysis of binary endpoints, reported as relative risk (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the unilateral spinal anaesthesia group compared with the bilateral spinal anaesthesia (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.55; P < 0.001; I2 = 38%). Subgroup analysis shows that the occurrence of hypotension was significantly lower in the unilateral subgroup, regardless of dosage, surgical site, adjuvants to the local anaesthetics, and different definitions of hypotension.
conclusionsUnilateral spinal anaesthesia is associated with a significant reduction in the occurrence of hypotension, despite variations in the definition of hypotension, adjuvants, and site of surgery. These results favour the use of lateral spinal anaesthesia in patients undergoing unilateral lower abdominal or lower limb surgery. However, the GRADE assessment of the quality of evidence was 'low' due to the high risk of bias and heterogeneity. All the results should be treated with caution.
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.