ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Ultrasound-guided midline versus paramedian approach for combined spinal-epidural anesthesia: A randomized controlled study.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ease of performing central neuraxial block with an innovative preprocedural ultrasound-assisted parasagittal interlaminar approach.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
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
Background and Aims: Neuraxial ultrasound (USG) can increase the success rate of neuraxial blocks, such as combined spinal-epidural (CSE). The two commonly practiced approaches for CSE are midline and paramedian. However, only a few studies have compared the USG-assisted midline and paramedian approaches. Therefore, we planned this study to evaluate and compare the efficacy of USG-assisted paramedian and midline approach for CSE anesthesia. Material and Methods: Eighty american society of anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I/II patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery under CSE anesthesia were enrolled. Patients were allocated to Group M (midline) or Group Results: The first-pass success rate was statistically comparable for Groups Conclusions: USG-assisted midline and paramedian approaches for CSE have comparable first-needle pass success rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.