Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28319550›Full record

Trial reportAnesthesia and analgesia2017

Continuous Transversus Abdominis Plane Nerve Blocks: Does Varying Local Anesthetic Delivery Method-Automatic Repeated Bolus Versus Continuous Basal Infusion-Influence the Extent of Sensation to Cold?: A Randomized, Triple-Masked, Crossover Study in Volunteers.

Bahareh Khatibi, Engy T Said, Jacklynn F Sztain, Amanda M Monahan, Rodney A Gabriel, Timothy J Furnish, Johnathan T Tran, Michael C Donohue, Brian M Ilfeld

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Anesthesia and analgesia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02662023 (Continuous Transversus Abdominis Plane Nerve Blocks), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT02662023 phase4completednot on this map

Continuous Transversus Abdominis Plane Nerve Blocks: Relative Effects of a Basal Infusion vs. Repeated Bolus Doses (A Randomized, Double-Masked, Active-Control, Split-Body, Crossover Study)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San DiegoRan2016 to 2016Enrolled24ConditionsPostoperative PainArmsBolus, Basal
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Bahareh Khatibi*Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California; †School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California; ‡Department of Neurology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California; and §Outcomes Research Consortium.
Engy T Said
Jacklynn F Sztain
Amanda M Monahan
Rodney A Gabriel
Timothy J Furnish
Johnathan T Tran
Michael C Donohue
Brian M Ilfeld

Funding

UC San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR001442 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S, HOGARTH, MICHAEL · 2015 to 2024
$88.3M
San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR000100 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S · 2012 to 2015
$19.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000100NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt remains unknown whether continuous or scheduled intermittent bolus local anesthetic administration is preferable for transversus abdominis plane (TAP) catheters. We therefore tested the hypothesis that when using TAP catheters, providing local anesthetic in repeated bolus doses increases the cephalad-caudad cutaneous effects compared with a basal-only infusion.

methodsBilateral TAP catheters (posterior approach) were inserted in 24 healthy volunteers followed by ropivacaine 2 mg/mL administration for a total of 6 hours. The right side was randomly assigned to either a basal infusion (8 mL/h) or bolus doses (24 mL administered every 3 hours for a total of 2 bolus doses) in a double-masked manner. The left side received the alternate treatment. The primary end point was the extent of sensory deficit as measured by cool roller along the axillary line at hour 6 (6 hours after the local anesthetic administration was initiated). Secondary end points included the extent of sensory deficit as measured by cool roller and Von Frey filaments along the axillary line and along a transverse line at the level of the anterior superior iliac spine at hours 0 to 6.

resultsAlthough there were statistically significant differences between treatments within the earlier part of the administration period, by hour 6 the difference in extent of sensory deficit to cold failed to reach statistical significance along the axillary line (mean = 0.9 cm; SD = 6.8; 95% confidence interval -2.0 to 3.8; P = .515) and transverse line (mean = 2.5 cm; SD = 10.1; 95% confidence interval -1.8 to 6.8; P = .244). Although the difference between treatments was statistically significant at various early time points for the horizontal, vertical, and estimated area measurements of both cold and mechanical pressure sensory deficits, no comparison remained statistically significant by hour 6.

conclusionsNo evidence was found in this study involving healthy volunteers to support the hypothesis that changing the local anesthetic administration technique (continuous basal versus hourly bolus) when using ropivacaine 0.2% and TAP catheters at 8 mL/h and 24 mL every 3 hours significantly influences the cutaneous effects after 6 hours of administration. Additional research is required to determine whether changing variables (eg, local anesthetic concentration, basal infusion rate, bolus dose volume, and/or interval) would provide different results.

Indexed as

Abdominal MusclesInfusion PumpsAmidesAnesthesia, LocalAnesthetics, LocalCold TemperatureCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodDrug Delivery SystemsFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleNerve BlockPain MeasurementRopivacaineAmidesAnesthetics, LocalRopivacaine

Identifiers

PMID28319550
PMCPMC5362121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.