ArticleCureus2025
Spinal Anesthesia for Ambulatory Surgery Using Hyperbaric Prilocaine vs Hyperbaric Bupivacaine: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Regional anaesthesia operationalisation for total hip arthroplasty in a high-volume specialised orthopaedic centre.British journal of anaesthesia · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Spinal anesthesia is a suitable technique for ambulatory surgery, offering benefits such as rapid recovery and minimal complications. The choice of local anesthetic is a key factor in achieving a rapid turnover in an ambulatory surgery unit. This study compares the safety and effectiveness of hyperbaric prilocaine and hyperbaric bupivacaine in an ambulatory setting. Methods A total of 114 patients undergoing ambulatory surgery were randomly allocated to receive either hyperbaric prilocaine (20mg/mL) or hyperbaric bupivacaine (5mg/mL). Time to first walk, time to discharge, and perioperative complications were compared. Results Eighty-nine patients were analyzed: the median time to first unassisted ambulation was significantly reduced by 41 minutes in the prilocaine group, and the average discharge time was reduced by 29 minutes. Hypotension was the most frequently observed complication, occurring in 17.4% of the prilocaine group and 16.3% of the bupivacaine group, with no statistically significant difference. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in other perioperative complications studied. Conclusion Hyperbaric prilocaine is a safe and effective alternative to hyperbaric bupivacaine for ambulatory surgery, offering a rapid onset and intermediate duration, resulting in earlier patient discharge. Improving the perioperative times can make the ambulatory unit more efficient and contribute to cost reduction.
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.