Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Comparison of the hemodynamic effects of ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for elective cesarean delivery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
backgroundWomen with term pregnancies undergoing cesarean delivery under combined spinal and epidural anesthesia (CSEA) usually present with hemodynamic variability and a high incidence of hypotension. Among the commonly used anesthetic drugs for CSEA, ropivacaine reduces the incidence of hypotension compared with bupivacaine. However, most studies have focused on blood pressure and heart rate measurements to evaluate the effects of these two anesthetic drugs on parturients. This study aimed to compare maternal cardiac output and hemodynamic parameters, such as cardiac preload and afterload, of ropivacaine and bupivacaine using transthoracic echocardiography.
methodsEighty-two parturients scheduled for elective caesarean deliveries under CSEA anesthesia were randomly assigned to receive 0.5% bupivacaine 7.5-8.5 mg (n = 41) or 0.5% ropivacaine 11-12.5 mg (n = 41) with different medication doses used for different height-ranges. Cardiac output, stroke volume (SV), ejection fraction, end-diastolic volume, end-diastolic volume, and systemic vascular resistance (SVR) were measured using transthoracic echocardiography before anesthesia; at 1, 5, and 10 min after CSEA; at delivery; and 1-2 min after the oxytocin administration. The primary outcome was the change in cardiac output (CO) at 5 min. Secondary outcomes included maternal hemodynamic, anesthetic efficacy, maternal side effects and fetal outcome data.
resultsNormalized cardiac output was higher in the ropivacaine group at 5 min after CSEA (92.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 87.1-98.3%) than in the bupivacaine group (79.8%; 95% CI: 74.2-85.3%) (P = 0.001). CO, SV, end-diastolic volume, and blood pressure were greater, systemic vascular resistance and phenylephrine dosage were lower, and the incidence of bradycardia was lower in the ropivacaine group. The 1-minute Apgar score was higher in the ropivacaine group (P = 0.043). Other neonatal outcomes were similar between the groups.
conclusionsCompared to bupivacaine, ropivacaine demonstrated higher cardiac output (CO), stroke volume (SV), blood pressure, and an improved 1-minute neonatal Apgar score in elective cesarean deliveries under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA).
trial registrationRegistration number: ChiCTR220006454. Date of registration: October 11, 2022.
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.