Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30837253›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2019

Effect of intrathecal morphine and epidural analgesia on postoperative recovery after abdominal surgery for gynecologic malignancy: an open-label randomised trial.

Preben Kjølhede, Olga Bergdahl, Ninnie Borendal Wodlin, Lena Nilsson

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02026687 (Will Intrathecal Analgesia Contribute to a Faster Recovery Compared With Epidural Analgesia After Open Surgery for Gynecological Cancer. An Open Controlled Randomized Study.), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT02026687 phase4completednot on this map

Will Intrathecal Analgesia Contribute to a Faster Recovery Compared With Epidural Analgesia After Open Surgery for Gynecological Cancer. An Open Controlled Randomized Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorLena NilssonRan2014 to 2016Enrolled80ConditionsGynecological CancerArmsEpidural, Intrathecal
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. A Narrative Review on Multimodal Spinal Anesthesia: Old Technique and New Use.Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Preben KjølhedeChildren and Women's Health, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5702-4116
Olga BergdahlDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vrinnevisjukhuset i Norrkoping, Norrkoping, Sweden.
Ninnie Borendal WodlinChildren and Women's Health, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Lena NilssonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, and Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Linköping University · SEVrinnevisjukhuset i Norrköping · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to determine whether regional analgesia with intrathecal morphine (ITM) in an enhanced recovery programme (enhanced recovery after surgery [ERAS]) gives a shorter hospital stay with good pain relief and equal health-related quality of life (QoL) to epidural analgesia (EDA) in women after midline laparotomy for proven or assumed gynaecological malignancies.

designAn open-label, randomised, single-centre study.

settingA tertiary referral Swedish university hospital.

participantsEighty women, 18-70 years of age, American Society of Anesthesiologists I and II, admitted consecutively to the department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

interventionsThe women were allocated (1:1) to either the standard analgesic method at the clinic (EDA) or the experimental treatment (ITM). An ERAS protocol with standardised perioperative routines and standardised general anaesthesia were applied. The EDA or ITM started immediately preoperatively. The ITM group received morphine, clonidine and bupivacaine intrathecally; the EDA group had an epidural infusion of bupivacaine, adrenalin and fentanyl. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary endpoint was length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary endpoints were QoL and pain assessments.

resultsLOS was statistically significantly shorter for the ITM group compared with the EDA group (median [IQR]3.3 [1.5-56.3] vs 4.3 [2.2-43.2] days; p=0.01). No differences were observed in pain assessment or QoL. The ITM group used postoperatively the first week significantly less opioids than the EDA group (median (IQR) 20 mg (14-35 mg) vs 81 mg (67-101 mg); p<0.0001). No serious adverse events were attributed to ITM or EDA.

conclusionsCompared with EDA, ITM is simpler to administer and manage, is associated with shorter hospital stay and reduces opioid consumption postoperatively with an equally good QoL. ITM is effective as postoperative analgesia in gynaecological cancer surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02026687; Results.

Indexed as

AgedAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthesia, EpiduralClonidineEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryFemaleGenital Neoplasms, FemaleHumansLaparotomyLength of StayMiddle AgedMorphinePostoperative PainPostoperative PeriodAnalgesics, OpioidClonidineMorphinegynecological malignancylaparotomyopioid consumptionquality improvementregional analgesia

Identifiers

PMID30837253
PMCPMC6430030
OpenAlexW2919117932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.