ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025
Comparison of postoperative pulmonary functions and outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal surgeries between general anaesthesia with thoracic epidural and thoracic continuous spinal anaesthesia: An exploratory randomised study.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Thoracic continuous spinal anaesthesia (TCSA) avoids airway instrumentation and mechanical ventilation and may provide better postoperative pulmonary outcomes compared to general anaesthesia (GA) with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) for patients requiring laparotomy. The study compared postoperative pulmonary functions and outcomes between these two anaesthesia techniques. Methods: Sixty adults were randomly assigned to Group GA+TEA or Group TCSA. In Group GA+TEA, the TEA was secured through the T9-T10 level, followed by GA. A 25-G catheter was placed at the same level in Group TCSA, and they received all preservative-free drugs (0.5% plain bupivacaine with 0.25 mg/kg ketamine and 0.03 mg/kg midazolam) to achieve a sensory block from T4 to L1. The primary outcome assessed was peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) over the 72 h postoperative period. The secondary outcomes assessed were breath-holding time (BHT), lung atelectasis, and change in transdiaphragmatic excursion. The two-sided Student Results: The PEFR was reduced in both groups from baseline ( Conclusion: In patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, the PEFRs during the postoperative period were comparable for GA with thoracic epidural versus thoracic continuous spinal anaesthesia.
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.