ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025
Effect of prophylactic phenylephrine versus norepinephrine on foeto-maternal outcomes in caesarean delivery under neuraxial anaesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 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
Background and Aims: The prevention of hypotension in parturients scheduled for caesarean section is of utmost importance for improving foeto-maternal outcomes. We compared the prophylactic use of phenylephrine (PE) and norepinephrine (NE) on foeto-maternal outcomes in women undergoing caesarean delivery under neuraxial anaesthesia. Umbilical artery (UA) pH was the primary objective, and umbilical vein (UV) pH, APGAR scores, incidence of bradycardia, hypotension, and hypertension were secondary objectives. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and CENTRAL databases were searched to identify all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published up to April 2023, further updated till May 2025. Our review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023429328). The effect of PE and NE on UA pH was our primary outcome. The quality of evidence of outcomes was graded using the GRADE methodology. Only RCTs involving term pregnant females undergoing caesarean section under neuraxial anaesthesia were included. Results: Seventeen trials (2138 patients) were included in the final analysis. NE and PE were comparable in terms of UA and UV pH, with standardised mean difference (SMD) of 0.18 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.09; 0.45] (I Conclusion: There is insufficient evidence to recommend using NE preemptively to improve foetal outcomes. Further studies are recommended to validate its effect.
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.