ArticleCureus2026
Anesthetic Management of a Parturient With Lipomyelomeningocele and Tethered Cord for Cesarean Section.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lipomyelomeningocele (LMMC) presents significant anesthetic challenges due to spinal cord tethering and distorted anatomy, which make the gold-standard neuraxial anesthesia technically difficult and neurologically risky. We report the case of a 29-year-old primigravida with LMMC and prior neurosurgeries scheduled for an elective cesarean section. Given the risk of direct neural injury and unpredictable block spread, a planned general anesthesia (GA) was performed, and a multimodal analgesic strategy was employed. The procedure was uneventful, resulting in a healthy neonate and a mother with excellent pain control and no deviation from her neurological baseline. This case demonstrates that while neuraxial techniques are usually preferred, GA is a safe and necessary alternative for patients with complex spinal dysraphism. Success requires a thorough preoperative neurological assessment, neuroimaging review, and tailored multidisciplinary approach.
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.