Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2025
A carbohydrate loading fasting protocol versus 'Sip til Send': a randomised trial of two different fasting protocols at elective caesarean delivery.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06505915 (Carbohydrate Loading Fasting Protocol Versus 'Sip Til Send'), which is not on this 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.
Carbohydrate Loading Fasting Protocol Versus 'Sip Til Send': A Randomised Trial of Two Different Fasting Protocols at Elective Caesarean Delivery
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Temperature Dysregulation Following Intrathecal Morphine for Cesarean Delivery Patients-A Scoping Review.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPulmonary aspiration under general anaesthesia is a rare but serious risk in obstetric populations, leading to conservative fasting protocols prior to elective caesarean delivery (CD). However, prolonged fasting may negatively impact maternal comfort and metabolic status. 'Sip til Send' (STS), a liberal fasting protocol permitting clear fluids until theatre admission, has been shown to improve the perioperative patient experience. Pre-operative carbohydrate loading (CHO), as part of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways, may offer additional benefits, yet its role in obstetrics is underexplored. This study aimed to compare CHO with STS in women undergoing elective CD, focusing on patient-reported comfort measures.
methodsIn this single-blinded, randomised controlled trial, 100 eligible women scheduled for elective CD under spinal anaesthesia were randomised to either STS or CHO groups. Women in the CHO group consumed two 200 ml carbohydrate drinks (Nutricia preOp™) pre-operatively. Primary outcomes included self-reported pre-operative thirst, hunger, nausea, dizziness, anxiety, and comfort using a 0-10 visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included ketonuria, blood glucose, lactate levels, intra-operative nausea, post-operative temperature, and recovery scores at 24 h.
resultsMean [SD] anxiety scores were significantly lower in the CHO group compared with STS (CHO 4.1 [2.9] vs STS 5.5 [2.6], p = 0.01. No other primary patient-reported outcomes differed significantly. Ketonuria was less prevalent in the CHO group (CHO 2/50 [4%] vs. STS 10/50 [20%], p = 0.002), and mean [SD] blood glucose was higher (CHO 5.0 [1.5] mmol.L
conclusionsPre-operative carbohydrate loading before elective CD significantly reduces maternal anxiety and ketonuria compared to a liberal clear fluid protocol. However, it was associated with increased intra-operative nausea and no improvement in other patient-centred outcomes or recovery quality. These findings suggest limited additional benefit of CHO over STS in this population. Further multicentre trials are warranted to refine carbohydrate loading protocols and assess their role in obstetric ERAS pathways.
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT06505915, 30th June 2024. Retrospectively registered.
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.