Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2009
Efficacy and safety of transnasal butorphanol for pain relief after anal surgery.
Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the analgesic properties and efficacy of transnasal butorphanol with intramuscular meperidine after anal surgery.
methodsSixty patients who underwent fistulectomy were enrolled in the study from January 2006 to December 2007. They were randomly divided into transnasal butorphanol (n = 30) or intramuscular meperidine (n = 30) treatment groups. Assessment of postoperative pain was made using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The VAS score was recorded 6 h after the completion of surgery, before receiving the first dose of analgesic, 60 min after analgesia and the next morning. Any adverse clinical effects such as somnolence, dizziness, nausea or vomiting were recorded. Satisfaction with narcotic efficacy, desire to use the particular analgesic in the future and any complaints were recorded by patients using questionnaires before being discharged.
resultsForty-two men and eighteen women were included in the study. There were no significant differences in VAS scores between the groups within 24 h. Length of hospital stay and the incidence of adverse effects between the groups were similar. In addition, most patients were satisfied with butorphanol nasal spray and wished to receive this analgesic in the future, if needed.
conclusionButorphanol nasal spray is effective for the relief of pain after fistulectomy. However, it offered patients more convenient usage and would be suitable for outpatients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.