Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23666275›Full record

Trial reportMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2013

Comparison of effects of epidural bupivacaine and intravenous meperidine analgesia on patient recovery following elective abdominal aortic surgery.

Nevriye Salman, Ahmet Baris Durukan, Hasan Alper Gurbuz, Hasan Yamalı, Leyla Guler, Halil Ibrahim Ucar, Cem Yorgancioglu

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nevriye SalmanDepartment of Anesthesia, Medicana International Ankara Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Ahmet Baris Durukan
Hasan Alper Gurbuz
Hasan Yamalı
Leyla Guler
Halil Ibrahim Ucar
Cem Yorgancioglu
Memorial Ankara Hospital · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe efficacy of epidural anesthesia and analgesia in management of perioperative stress has been established. Perioperative pain management strategies decrease surgical complications and aid recovery. In this study, we aimed to document and compare the efficacy of epidural bupivacaine and intravenous meperidine on recovery of patients with elective abdominal aortic surgery performed under general anesthesia. MATERIAL AND

methodsPatients undergoing elective abdominal aortic surgery between February 2009 and November 2011 were studied prospectively. Patients were randomized into epidural bupivacaine (n=40) and intravenous meperidine (n=40) groups regarding postoperative analgesia strategy. The preoperative demographic characteristics, perioperative outcomes, postoperative adverse effects of analgesia strategy, time to initiate oral intake, sedation scores, visual analogue scale results, and mobility scores were compared.

resultsThe mean ages of the patients were 61.7±8.1 in the epidural group and 59.4±9.7 in the intravenous group (p>0.05). The preoperative demographic characteristics of the patients were comparable between the groups. There were no statistically significant differences between groups regarding anesthesia times, intubation times, intensive care unit stay, hospital length of stay, postoperative vomiting, and postoperative cardiac, renal, and cerebral complications. Postoperative nausea was more prevalent in the meperidine group (p<0.05). In the epidural group, time to begin oral intake was shorter, sedation scores and visual analogue scale results were lower, and mobility scores were higher (p<0.05 each).

conclusionsEpidural analgesia allowed earlier recovery compared to intravenous analgesia in patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic surgery, but did not affect postoperative outcomes and complications.

Indexed as

Analgesia, EpiduralElective Surgical ProceduresAorta, AbdominalBupivacaineDemographyFemaleHumansInjections, IntravenousMaleMeperidineMiddle AgedPerioperative CareRecovery of FunctionTreatment OutcomeBupivacaineMeperidine

Identifiers

PMID23666275
PMCPMC3659110
OpenAlexW2006127940

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.