Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41293134›Full record

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.

Gourav Kumar, Praveen Talawar, Gaurav Jain, Ruma Thakuria, Amit Gupta, Nikita Choudhary

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

6 authors.

Gourav KumarJunior Resident, Department of Anaesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8376-6963
Praveen TalawarAdditional Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9931-2316
Gaurav JainProfessor, Department of Anaesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1205-7237
Ruma ThakuriaAssistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5963-7549
Amit GuptaProfessor, Department of Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4847-4120
Nikita ChoudharyAssistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1622-1193

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Epidural anaesthesiapeak expiratory flow ratepostoperative complicationspostoperative nausea and vomitingpulmonary atelectasispulmonary function testspinal anaesthesiathoracic continuous spinal anaesthesia

Identifiers

PMID41293134
PMCPMC12643141

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.