ArticleJournal of pain research2025
Comparison of Surgical Anesthesia Onset Between Dural-Puncture Epidural and Standard Epidural Techniques for Emergency Cesarean Section: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Purpose: The dural-puncture epidural (DPE) and standard epidural (EP) techniques are well-established methods for neuraxial analgesia during labor. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the conversion of DPE-induced labor analgesia to surgical anesthesia during cesarean sections, particularly regarding efficacy and timing. This study will compare the surgical anesthesia onset time between DPE and EP in parturients undergoing emergency cesarean delivery after conversion from labor analgesia. Patients and Methods: This double-blind, randomized clinical study will include 124 parturients. Parturients aged ≥18 years with singleton pregnancies who request labor analgesia will be randomly assigned to receive either DPE or EP anesthesia in the labor and delivery rooms. Participants will be excluded if they have contraindications to neuraxial anesthesia, back surgery or scoliosis history, significant fetal anomalies, or a known allergy to any of the study medications. Epidural labor analgesia will be maintained using a low concentration of ropivacaine in combination with sufentanil, delivered through the epidural catheter. During delivery, an emergency intrapartum cesarean section following labor analgesia may be necessary among these parturients. Parturients requiring intrapartum cesarean delivery following labor analgesia will be eligible. Epidural extension anesthesia will be administered in the operating room. The primary outcome measure will be the time from chloroprocaine administration to the achievement of a surgical level of anesthesia, defined as a T6 sensory block. Secondary outcomes will include epidural anesthesia quality, incidence of conversion to cesarean section between the two techniques, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Conclusion: This study will estimate the onset time to achieve surgical anesthesia during epidural extension using a DPE compared to an EP technique. The results may provide a deeper understanding of the advantages of the DPE technique in labor analgesia, as well as determine the onset time and reliability of anesthesia block during conversion from labor analgesia to cesarean delivery. Trial Registration: ChiCTR2400089237. Registered September 4, 2024.
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.