Ultrasound-guided Versus Landmark-based Spinal Anesthesia in Obese Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Section
ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Summary
NIH's ClinicalTrials.gov has registered a prospective randomized controlled trial (NCT07549776) comparing ultrasound-guided preprocedural marking versus anatomical landmark palpation for spinal anesthesia in 100 obese pregnant women undergoing cesarean section. The primary outcome is first-attempt success rate, with secondary outcomes including number of attempts, needle redirections, need for rescue interventions, adverse events during puncture, and procedural times. The study's findings may inform clinical practice guidelines for anesthesia in obese parturients but does not create compliance obligations.
“This study is a prospective randomized controlled trial including 100 obese parturients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia.”
About this source
ClinicalTrials.gov is the NIH-run registry of every clinical trial conducted in the United States, plus most international trials sponsored by US-based companies or institutions. By federal law, sponsors must register Phase 2 through Phase 4 studies before enrolling patients and post results within a year of completion. This feed tracks every new trial registration and study update, around 700 a month: drug interventions, device studies, behavioral protocols, observational research. Watch this if you scout drug candidates moving into mid or late-stage development, monitor competitor pipelines, or follow rare disease research where new trials signal patient hope. GovPing parses sponsor, phase, intervention, and target indication on each entry.
What changed
This is a clinical trial registration entry for a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing two spinal anesthesia techniques in obese pregnant women undergoing cesarean delivery. The trial will enroll 100 participants and randomize them to either ultrasound-guided puncture site identification or traditional anatomical landmark palpation. The study aims to determine whether preprocedural ultrasound improves first-attempt success rates in a population where landmark identification is challenging due to altered anatomy.
For healthcare providers and clinical investigators, this registration signals ongoing research interest in improving anesthesia techniques for obese patients. Anesthesiology departments conducting similar procedures may wish to monitor results for potential practice implications, though trial completion and publication are required before any clinical adoption considerations.
Archived snapshot
Apr 24, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
Ultrasound-guided Versus Landmark-based Spinal Anesthesia in Obese Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Section
N/A NCT07549776 Kind: NA Apr 24, 2026
Abstract
Spinal anesthesia is the most commonly used technique for cesarean section. However, in obese parturients, identification of the optimal puncture site using anatomical landmark palpation can be challenging due to altered anatomy. Ultrasound has been proposed as a tool to improve localization of the puncture site.
This study is a prospective randomized controlled trial including 100 obese parturients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Participants are randomly assigned to one of two groups: an ultrasound group, in which the puncture site is identified using preprocedural ultrasound, and a landmark group, in which the puncture site is determined using anatomical landmark palpation.
The primary outcome is the first-attempt success rate. Secondary outcomes include the number of attempts, needle redirections, need for rescue interventions, incidence of adverse events during puncture, and procedural times.
Conditions: Obesity, Cesarean Section
Interventions: Ultrasound-guided preprocedural marking, Landmark-based palpation
Related changes
Get daily alerts for ClinicalTrials.gov Studies
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Source
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from NIH.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when ClinicalTrials.gov Studies publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.