← Human Trials & Peer-Reviewed Studies

Magnesium sulfate does not reduce postoperative analgesic requirements.

Plain-language guide to PMID 11575536 (2001): double-blind randomized controlled trial of Magnesium Sulfate.

Key Facts

PMID
11575536
Journal
Anesthesiology
Year
2001
Study type
Randomized Controlled Trial
Authors
Ko SH et al. (6 authors)
DOI
10.1097/00000542-200109000-00016

What This Study Did, in Plain Language

What Was Tested

This randomized controlled trial looks at Magnesium Sulfate.

The current study was designed to evaluate whether perioperative intravenous magnesium sulfate infusion affects postoperative pain.

The cumulative postoperative analgesic consumption was measured to assess the analgesic effect using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia device.

Why It Was Studied

However, transport of magnesium from blood to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) across the blood-brain barrier is limited in normal humans.

Who Took Part

The age groups tagged for this paper are adults and middle-aged adults, women only.

How the Study Was Run

The design is described as randomized, double-blind and pilot.

Because people in this Magnesium Sulfate study were split into groups at random, differences between the groups are less likely to reflect who happened to join each one.

As a double-blind Magnesium Sulfate study, the assignments were hidden from both participants and investigators until the end.

It is described as a pilot, a small early test of whether a larger Magnesium Sulfate study would be practical.

At the end of surgery, serum and CSF magnesium concentration were measured in both groups.

Pain intensities at rest and during forced expiration were evaluated at 6, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively.

What Was Measured

PubMed files the paper under topics including Blood-Brain Barrier, Magnesium, Magnesium Sulfate, Postoperative Pain, Pilot Projects and Receptors, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, double-blind and pilot study of Magnesium Sulfate.

The abstract goes on to report its results in about 8 sentences; this page does not restate them, so read the paper for the findings and their limits.

The publication is from 2001 (Anesthesiology), a journal based in United States.

More context: all human trials.

Related Pages

Source: PubMed record. This explanation is written by PeptideWhiz from the public record. For research and education only. Not medical advice; no dosing information is given.