Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42077590›Full record

Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2026

Vasopressor Regimens and Maternal Core Temperature During Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized, Double‑blind, Non‑inferiority Trial.

Wenhui Tao, Jinfeng Bao, Haifeng Cao, Yifei Dong, Quanlong Fang, Meng Jiang, YuLe Wu, Jie Song, Yufang Xie, Xin Wang and 3 more

Abstract readEquivalence TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 2026. 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

13 authors.

Wenhui TaoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
Jinfeng BaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, the second People's Hospital of Hefei (Hefei Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University), Hefei, Anhui, 230011, People's Republic of China.
Haifeng CaoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
Yifei DongDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
Quanlong FangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
Meng JiangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
YuLe WuDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
Jie SongDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.
Yufang XieDepartment of Anesthesiology, the second People's Hospital of Hefei (Hefei Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University), Hefei, Anhui, 230011, People's Republic of China.
Xin WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, the second People's Hospital of Hefei (Hefei Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University), Hefei, Anhui, 230011, People's Republic of China.
Wensheng HeDepartment of Anesthesiology, the second People's Hospital of Hefei (Hefei Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University), Hefei, Anhui, 230011, People's Republic of China.
Ye ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0009-0005-8862-5797
Xianwen HuDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Key Laboratory of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine of Anhui Higher Education Institutes, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, 230601, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Norepinephrine (NE), a vasopressor commonly used during cesarean section, avoids the phenylephrine (PE)-induced decreases in heart rate and cardiac output. Conversely, PE reduces the incidence and severity of maternal shivering and hypothermia during cesarean section. Therefore, before recommending NE as a complete replacement for PE, their effects on maternal core temperature must be compared. This study aimed to determine whether prophylactic infusion of NE is non-inferior to PE in maintaining maternal core temperature. Materials and Methods: One hundred and forty eligible women scheduled for cesarean section under spinal or combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia were randomly assigned to either the NE or PE group. All participants, caregivers, and outcome assessors were blinded. NE (8 μg/mL) or PE (100 μg/mL) was administered intravenously at a fixed rate of 15 mL/h (equivalent to NE 2 μg/min or PE 25 μg/min), starting concurrently with the subarachnoid injection, and continuing until the end of surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative maternal core temperature, with a non-inferiority margin set at 0.2°C. Results: Postoperative maternal core temperature was non-inferior in the NE group (mean, 36.35°C; 95% confidence interval [CI], 36.28-36.42) compared to the PE group (mean, 36.41°C; 95% CI, 36.34-36.49). The mean difference between the two groups was -0.06°C (95% CI, - 0.16 to 0.04), meeting the criterion for non-inferiority (one-sided Conclusion: NE was not inferior to PE regarding its effect on maternal core temperature, providing a rationale for its use during cesarean sections.

Indexed as

Body TemperatureCesarean SectionHypothermiaNorepinephrinePhenylephrineVasoconstrictor AgentsAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansPregnancyNorepinephrinePhenylephrineVasoconstrictor Agentsbody temperaturecesarean sectionnorepinephrinephenylephrinespinal anaesthesia

Identifiers

PMID42077590
PMCPMC13134560

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.