Hypotension after unilateral versus bilateral spinal anaesthesia: A Systematic review with meta-analysis
Pooled result · HypotensionResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.38 95% CI 0.27–0.55Authors' conclusion
Unilateral spinal anaesthesia is associated with a significant reduction in the occurrence of hypotension, despite variations in the definition of hypotension, adjuvants, and site of surgery.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing unilateral lower extremity surgery or lower abdominal surgery under spinal anaesthesia
- Participants
- 1,358 patients · 21 randomised controlled trials (RCTs)
- Comparison
- Unilateral vs bilateral spinal anaesthesia
- Outcome
- Incidence of hypotension
Methodological detailsMantel-Haenszel random-effect model, subgroup and sensitivity analyses, GRADE quality of evidence 'low' due to high risk of bias and heterogeneity
- Mantel-Haenszel random-effect model
- Subgroup and sensitivity analyses
- GRADE quality of evidence 'low' due to high risk of bias and heterogeneity
Pooled result
Hypotension
Relative risk
0.38
95% CI 0.27–0.55
P < 0.001
Unilateral vs Bilateral
RR 0.38 (95% CI 0.27–0.55); P < 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Further pooled results
Hypotension by dosage, surgical site, adjuvants, definition of hypotension (subgroup)
- Hypotension significantly lower with unilateral spinal anaesthesia in all subgroups
Original publication
Hypotension after unilateral versus bilateral spinal anaesthesia: A Systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur J Anaesthesiol. Published 21 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →