ArticleCureus2026
Dexmedetomidine Versus Dexamethasone as Adjuvants to Bupivacaine for Wound Infiltration After Caesarean Section Under Spinal Anaesthesia.
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
objectivePostoperative pain control is central to recovery after caesarean section. As wound infiltration is a standard multimodal analgesia component, we compared dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as bupivacaine adjuvants for wound infiltration in women undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia, focusing on analgesic performance and safety.
methodsThis prospective, randomised, double-blind trial enrolled 90 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II women scheduled for elective caesarean section, divided equally into three groups: 0.25% bupivacaine alone (Group B), bupivacaine with dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg (Group BDM), or bupivacaine with dexamethasone 8 mg (Group BDX). The main measure was total tramadol use over the first postoperative day; other measures included time to first rescue dose, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores, patient satisfaction, haemodynamic readings, sedation, and adverse events.
resultsTramadol use varied significantly by group (P<0.0001) - lowest in Group BDM (87.33 ± 17.40 mg), followed by Group BDX (129.43 ± 15.61 mg) and Group B (150.33 ± 14.59 mg). Time to first rescue analgesia was longest in Group BDM (6.00 ± 0.10 hours), then Group BDX (4.00 ± 2.03 hours) and Group B (1.87 ± 0.35 hours) (P<0.0001). Both adjuvants outperformed bupivacaine alone for pain control, with dexmedetomidine giving the strongest analgesia and highest satisfaction scores. Haemodynamics, sedation, and adverse event rates were similar across groups.
conclusionAdding dexmedetomidine or dexamethasone to bupivacaine improved postoperative analgesia after caesarean section. Dexmedetomidine provided greater opioid sparing, longer analgesia, superior pain control, and higher patient satisfaction without compromising safety, supporting its use as an effective adjunct to bupivacaine wound infiltration.
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.