ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2026
Efficacy and safety of labetalol vs. Hydralazine in pregnant women with severe hypertension.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of labetalol versus hydralazine in managing severe hypertension during pregnancy. Methodology: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in the unit of the Department of Gynecology, Services Hospital Lahore, from July 30, 2021, to November 30, 2022. Recruitment of 320 pregnant women diagnosed with severe hypertension were allocated into two treatment groups. Group-A (n=160) received IV labetalol in incremental doses up to 80 mg at 20 minutes interval with maximum cumulative dose of 300 mg, and Group-B (n=160) was administered IV hydralazine in 5mg dose over five minutes, repeated at 20 minutes interval with maximum of five doses. Blood pressure and pulse were monitored every 10 minutes, with follow-up lasting for one hour. Efficacy was defined as achieving target BP ≤140/100 mmHg. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 23. Results: The target BP was achieved in 248 (77.50%) women, with 134 (83.8%) in the labetalol Group-And 114 (71.2%) in the hydralazine group (p=0.007). Hydralazine achieved BP control faster (50.25 ± 20.43 min vs. 75.34 ± 35.67 min, p=0.001), with fewer doses required (1.85 ± 0.92 vs. 3.68 ± 1.45, p=0.0001). Conclusion: Labetalol showed better overall efficacy, while hydralazine provided faster BP control with higher adverse effects. Labetalol is recommended for sustained BP management, and hydralazine for rapid BP reduction.
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.