Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40979765›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025

Application efficacy of dural puncture epidural versus traditional combined spinal epidural for labour analgesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

Junjun Qin, Weili Zhou, Zhengwei Chen, Changlin He, Jiasen Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Junjun QinDoctor of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9928-5772
Weili ZhouHead Nurse, Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0884-7600
Zhengwei ChenDoctor of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7486-0483
Changlin HeProfessor, Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3908-0086
Jiasen MaDoctor of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8316-2258

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dural puncture epidural (DPE) and combined spinal epidural (CSE) for labour analgesia in parturients. Methods: Searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang Database, VIP Database, and CBM Database up to June 2025 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the application of DPE and CSE techniques for labour analgesia in parturients. Data from eligible studies were pooled to calculate the combined standardised mean difference (SMD) or risk ratio (RR). Results: Eleven studies with 1461 parturients were included. DPE had higher visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores at 10 min [SMD: 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24, 0.95; Conclusion: Compared with CSE, although DPE has a slower onset of analgesia, it may provide more reliable analgesic effects and result in lower incidence rates of adverse reactions in both parturients and foetuses. Substantial heterogeneity in some outcomes, driven by clinical heterogeneity including dose variations and limited studies, warrants cautious interpretation.

Indexed as

Anaesthesiacombined spinal epiduraldural puncture epidurallabourlabour analgesiameta-analysisobstetricparturientspinal

Identifiers

PMID40979765
PMCPMC12445766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.