Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28562733›Full record

Trial reportSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina

Randomized clinical study on the analgesic effect of local infiltration versus spinal block for hemorrhoidectomy.

Luis Antônio Borges, Plínio da Cunha Leal, Ed Carlos Rey Moura, Rioko Kimiko Sakata

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondFull text readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02839538 (A Comparative Randomised Study of the Analgesic Effect of Local Infiltration or Spinal Block for Haemorrhoidectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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.

NCT02839538 phase4completednot on this map

A Comparative Randomised Study of the Analgesic Effect of Local Infiltration or Spinal Block for Haemorrhoidectomy

TypeinterventionalSponsorFederal University of São PauloRan2014 to 2015Enrolled40ConditionsPostoperative PainArmsLocal Infiltration, Subarachnoidal block
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Luis Antônio BorgesMD. Anesthesiologist, Hospital Municipal Dr. Mário Gatti, Campinas (SP), Brazil.
Plínio da Cunha LealMD, PhD. Professor, Department of Medical Practice, Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luiz (MA), Brazil.
Ed Carlos Rey MouraMD, MSc. Professor, Department of Medical Practice, Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luiz (MA), Brazil.
Rioko Kimiko SakataMD, PhD. Professor, Department of Anesthesia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Maranhão · BRHospital Estadual Mário Covas · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectives: Postoperative analgesia and early recovery are important for hospital discharge. The primary objective of this study was to compare the analgesic effectiveness of perianal infiltration and subarachnoid anesthesia for hemorrhoidectomy. The secondary objective was to compare time to discharge, adverse effects and complications. DESIGN AND

setting: Randomized, prospective and comparative study at Dr. Mário Gatti Hospital.

methods: Forty patients aged 18-60, in American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status category 1 or 2, were included. The local group (LG) received local infiltration (0.75% ropivacaine) under general anesthesia; the spinal group (SG) received subarachnoid block (2 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine). Analgesic supplementation consisted of fentanyl for LG and lidocaine for SG. Postoperative pain intensity, sphincter relaxation, lower-limb strength, time to discharge, analgesic dose over one week and adverse effects were assessed.

results: Eleven LG patients (52.4%) required supplementation, but no SG patients. Pain intensity was higher for LG up to 120 min, but there were no differences at 150 or 180 min. There were no differences in the need for paracetamol or tramadol. Times to first analgesic supplementation and hospital discharge were longer for SG. The adverse effects were nausea, dizziness and urinary retention.

conclusions: Pain intensity was higher in LG than in SG over the first 2 h, but without differences after 150 and 180 min. Time to first supplementation was shorter in LG. There were no differences in doses of paracetamol and tramadol, or in adverse effects. REGISTRATION:: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02839538.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnal CanalAnalgesiaAnalgesicsAnesthesia, LocalAnesthesia, SpinalFemaleHemorrhoidectomyHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PainAnalgesics

Identifiers

PMID28562733
PMCPMC10019844
OpenAlexW2620878220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read28
identifiers read1
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.