SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2025
Comparative efficacy and safety of local anesthesia combinations for labor pain relief: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determining the Optimal Volume of Ropivacaine Combined with Dexmedetomidine for Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus in Labor Analgesia: A Randomized Dose-Response Study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Impact of different sufentanil concentrations in epidural labor analgesia on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a propensity score-matched cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Review
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
backgroundEpidural anesthesia stands out as the most commonly employed approach for labor analgesia, frequently complemented by various local anesthetics, and the analgesic effectiveness and safety profiles of distinct local anesthetic regimens are different. To compare the efficacy and adverse reactions of different local anesthetic regimens in relieving labor pain by performing a network meta-analysis.
methodsWe systematically searched four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials from the inception of the databases up to March 3, 2025. Included in the study were patients aged 18 to 35 years who underwent painless delivery under epidural anesthesia.
resultsThe meta-analysis included a total of 59 studies involving 6972 patients. The combination of Ropivacaine_Dexmedetomidine_Sufentanil (Rop_Dex_Suf) was the most effective and fast in reducing Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at 30 min after block, compared to most other anesthesia schemes. Labor pain lasted for the longest time with Ropivacaine_Dexmedetomidine(Rop_Dex). Meanwhile, Bupivacaine_Pethidine(Bpv_Pet), Bupivacaine_Dexmedetomidine(Bpv_Dex), Fentanyl(Fen), and Bupivacaine_Diamorphine(Bpv_DiaMor) had the lowest incidence of nausea, vomiting, hypotension, and pruritus. Besides, Bupivacaine_Dexmedetomidine(Bpv_Dex), Ropivacaine_Dexmedetomidine(Rop_Dex), and Ropivacaine_Dexmedetomidine_Sufentanil (Rop_Dex_Suf) have demonstrated outstanding analgesic efficacy and safety.
conclusionsOur study demonstrates that the combination of ropivacaine, dexmedetomidine, and sufentanil is the most effective regimen for alleviating labor pain. Nonetheless, given the limited number of studies on certain protocols, additional high-quality, large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are anticipated to substantiate our conclusion in the future. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023459538. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.