Evidence Hub

Esketamine prevents carboprost-induced adverse reactions during cesarean section under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia: a double-blind, randomized trial

Zhou F, Ma Q, Meng F, Bao H, Liu W, Zhang G, Tian Y

BMC anesthesiology, 2025

1 citation

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate adverse reactions to carboprost reduced by intravenous esketamine administered after childbirth via cesarean delivery with the patient under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia.

Methods: The study enrolled pregnant women aged 20-40 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class II or III, and a gestational age of 37 weeks or more. These women had a scheduled cesarean section procedure with the administration of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. Patients were randomized to receive esketamine 0.5 mg/kg (Group E) or volume-matched normal saline (Group C) immediately after fetal delivery, prior to carboprost administration (250 µg intramuscularly). The primary outcome was the incidence of vomiting during surgery. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of adverse reactions (nausea, chest rigidity, flushed face, tachycardia, cough, shivering), vital signs (HR, RR, MAP, SPO2) and postoperative pain assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

Results: Eighty-one pregnant women completed the study. The incidence of vomiting (22.5% vs. 56.1%, p < 0.001) and the incidence of nausea, chest rigidity, flushed face, and hypertension were significantly lower in group E than in group C (all p < 0.01), but the incidence of tachycardia was higher in group E (45% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the patients' arterial partial pressure of oxygen was significantly higher in group E than in group C (91.90 ± 5.14 vs. 79.76 ± 3.96, p < 0.001).…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free