Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16392884›Full record

ReviewDrugs2005

Ropivacaine: a review of its use in regional anaesthesia and acute pain management.

Dene Simpson, Monique P Curran, Vicki Oldfield, Gillian M Keating

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 179 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Nerve blocks for initial pain management of femoral fractures in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dene SimpsonAdis International Limited, Auckland, New Zealand. demail@adis.co.nz
Monique P Curran
Vicki Oldfield
Gillian M Keating

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ropivacaine (Naropin) is the pure S(-)-enantiomer of propivacaine, and is a long-acting amide local anaesthetic agent, eliciting nerve block via reversible inhibition of sodium ion influx in nerve fibres. Ropivacaine is a well tolerated regional anaesthetic effective for surgical anaesthesia as well as the relief of postoperative and labour pain. The efficacy of ropivacaine is similar to that of bupivacaine and levobupivacaine for peripheral nerve blocks and, although it may be slightly less potent than bupivacaine when administered epidurally or intrathecally, equi-effective doses have been established. Clinically adequate doses of ropivacaine appear to be associated with a lower incidence or grade of motor block than bupivacaine. Thus ropivacaine, with its efficacy, lower propensity for motor block and reduced potential for CNS toxicity and cardiotoxicity, appears to be an important option for regional anaesthesia and for the management of postoperative and labour pain.

Indexed as

Anesthesia, ConductionAcute DiseaseAdultAmidesAnesthetics, LocalChildDrug InteractionsFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornLabor PainPainPostoperative PainPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRopivacaineAmidesAnesthetics, LocalRopivacaine

Identifiers

PMID16392884
OpenAlexW1988025736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.