↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Phenylephrine and Ephedrine in Treatment of Spinal-Induced Hypotension in High-Risk Pregnancies: A Narrative Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of Phenylephrine and Ephedrine in Treatment of Spinal-Induced Hypotension in High-Risk Pregnancies: A Narrative Review
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2017.00002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sasima Dusitkasem, Blair H. Herndon, Monsicha Somjit, David L. Stahl, Emily Bitticker, John C. Coffman

Abstract

To compare maternal and fetal effects of intravenous phenylephrine and ephedrine administration during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in high-risk pregnancies. An extensive literature search was conducted using the US National Library of Medicine, MEDLINE search engine, Cochrane review, and Google Scholar using search terms "ephedrine and phenylephrine," "preterm and term and spinal hypotension," "preeclampsia and healthy parturients," or "multiple and singleton gestation and vasopressor." Society of Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology meeting abstracts for the past 4 years were also searched for relevant studies. Both phenylephrine and ephedrine can be safely used to counteract hypotension after spinal anesthesia in patients with uteroplacental insufficiency, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and in non-elective cesarean deliveries. Vasopressor requirements before delivery in high-risk cesarean sections are reduced compared to healthy parturients. Among the articles reviewed, there were no statistically significant differences in umbilical arterial pH, umbilical venous pH, incidence of fetal acidosis, Apgar scores, or maternal hypotension when comparing maternal phenylephrine and ephedrine use. From the limited existing data, phenylephrine and ephedrine are both appropriate selections for treating or preventing hypotension induced by neuraxial blockade in high-risk pregnancies. There is no clear evidence that either medication is more effective at maintaining maternal blood pressure or has a superior safety profile in this setting. Further investigations are required to determine the efficacy, ideal dosing regimens, and overall safety of phenylephrine and ephedrine administration in high-risk obstetric patients, especially in the presence uteroplacental insufficiency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 24 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 25 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,280,168
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#815
of 5,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,807
of 417,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#6
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 417,315 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.