ArticleBMC anesthesiology2025
Comparison of dezocine and hydromorphone in post-cesarean epidural analgesia: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative pain management following cesarean delivery is essential for optimizing maternal recovery and reducing complications. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) is widely used; however, the choice of opioid remains debated due to variations in effectiveness and side effect profiles. This study aims to compare the analgesic effectiveness and adverse effects of dezocine and hydromorphone in PCEA regimens for cesarean delivery.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 1,582 parturients who underwent cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia and received postoperative PCEA between March 2019 and July 2022 were reviewed. 755 patients received dezocine (Group D) and 827 received hydromorphone (Group H). All patients received 250 mg ropivacaine compounded with either 10 mg dezocine or 4 mg hydromorphone, diluted to 250 ml. Primary outcomes included analgesic effectiveness (assessed via VAS scores, PCEA bolus frequency, and rescue analgesia rates) and adverse effects (nausea/vomiting, pruritus, lower limb numbness and motor block).
resultsBaseline demographic characteristics were comparable between groups (P > 0.05). Both groups showed comparable analgesic effectiveness with no significant differences in VAS scores (P = 0.29), PCEA bolus usage (P = 0.36), or need for rescue analgesia (P = 0.18). However, Group D experienced significantly fewer adverse effects. The incidence of nausea/vomiting was 16.9% in Group D vs. 28.1% in Group H (P < 0.001), and pruritus occurred in 12.3% vs. 24.8% (P < 0.001), respectively. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of lower limb numbness (P = 0.33) or motor block as assessed by Bromage score(P = 0.41).
conclusionsDezocine and hydromorphone demonstrated comparable analgesic effectiveness when administered via patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) following cesarean delivery. However, dezocine was associated with a significantly lower incidence of opioid-related adverse effects, indicating that it may serve as a safer and more tolerable alternative for postoperative pain management in obstetric patients.
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.