Trial reportIndian heart journal
Modified Valsalva versus standard Valsalva manoeuvre in patients with paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia in the emergency department: A randomised trial.
Trial report in Indian heart journal. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveVagal manoeuvres, particularly the Valsalva manoeuvre (VM), are recommended as first-line therapy for paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of a modified Valsalva manoeuvre with the standard technique in terminating PSVT in the emergency department.
methodsThis prospective, randomised, parallel-group trial was conducted in the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital. Adults with stable PSVT were randomised (1:1) to receive either a modified or standard Valsalva manoeuvre. The modified manoeuvre involved a 40-mmHg strain for 15 s in a semi-recumbent position followed by immediate supine repositioning with passive leg elevation, while the standard manoeuvre comprised a 40-mmHg strain for 15 s in the semi-recumbent position alone. The primary outcome was return to sinus rhythm at 1 min, confirmed by electrocardiography.
resultsA total of 75 participants were enrolled (37 in the standard group and 38 in the modified group) on an intention-to-treat basis. Sinus rhythm was restored in 10 of 38 patients (26.3%) in the modified Valsalva group compared with 6 of 37 patients (16.2%) in the standard group (odds ratio 0.54; 95% CI 0.17-1.68; p > 0.05). No serious adverse events were observed in either group.
conclusionsThe modified Valsalva manoeuvre demonstrated a higher, though not statistically significant, cardioversion rate compared with the standard technique. Both manoeuvres were safe and well tolerated. Larger adequately powered studies are required to establish definitive efficacy.
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.