MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399331497 · doi:10.4103/sja.sja_112_24

Efficacy and safety of adjuvant intrathecal dexamethasone during spinal anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4399331497 on OpenAlexaff
Thrivikrama Padur Tantry, Vasantha Shetty, Aarti Deepak, Sumesh Murali, Murali S. B. Golitadka, Shreejith Kumar Menon, Sunil P. Shenoy, Dinesh Kadam

Bibliographic record

VenueSaudi Journal of Anaesthesia · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDexamethasoneMeta-analysisIntrathecalSpinal anesthesiaAnesthesiaAdjuvantOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of intrathecal (IT) dexamethasone during subarachnoid block (SAB) has not been evaluated. There are no pooled data available to decide on the optimal regimen of IT dexamethasone during SAB, irrespective of the type of surgery. There is uncertainty about its dosage, effectiveness, and safety, and a need to establish clear guidelines on its use. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of use of IT dexamethasone during SAB. We performed a meta-analysis (PROSPERO, CRD42022304944) of trials that included patients who underwent a variety of surgical procedures under SAB. Patients received concomitant IT dexamethasone as an adjuvant to spinal local anesthetics. The analyzed outcomes included sensory and motor effects as well as adverse and/or beneficial side effects. Subgroup analysis was planned based on different doses used. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to estimate the required sample size information (RIS) for each outcome. Eighteen studies (2531 participants) were included in this analysis. Addition of IT dexamethasone (4-8 mg) to heavy bupivacaine effectively prolonged the duration of sensory blockade (mean difference, MD = 63.8 minutes; [95% confidence interval, CI, 33.1-94.5], P < 0.0001), two-segment regression time (MD = 20.1[95% CI, 0.96-39.2], P = 0.04) and first rescue analgesic time (MD = 143.3 [95% CI, 90.3-196.0], P = 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed superior effects of 8 mg dose over 4 mg for sensory and analgesic effects. The effect of dexamethasone on duration of motor blockade was inconclusive. Additionally, lower risk ratios (RRs) were recorded for spinal anesthesia-related hypotension (RR = 0.74 [95% CI, 0.6-0.9], P = 0.0003) and nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.62 [95% CI, 0.41-0.93], P = 0.02) in the dexamethasone group. For outcomes such as sensory blockade, analgesia, and hypotension, the required information size was reached during TSA. In conclusion, IT dexamethasone, used as an adjuvant to spinal local anesthetic, especially at the dose of 8 mg, increases sensory blockade duration and the time for request of the first rescue analgesic. SAB-induced side effects such as hypotension, nausea, and vomiting are lesser with the use of IT dexamethasone. However, further studies are necessary to draw meaningful conclusions on its safety profile.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.032
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSaudi Journal of AnaesthesiaSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207