ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2019
Efficacy of local wound infiltration analgesia with ropivacaine and dexmedetomidine in tubercular spine surgery - A pilot randomised double-blind controlled trial.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Ropivacaine instillation through subgaleal drain: A novel approach for acute post-craniotomy pain.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Comparison of thoracolumbar interfascial plane block with local anaesthetic infiltration in lumbar spine surgeries - A prospective double-blinded randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Dexmedetomidine: A drug for all seasons?Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
- Continuous local infiltration using suction drain: A cheap and innovative alternative in epidural contraindicated patients.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2020Article
- Perioperative concerns in Pott's spine: A review.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyReview
- Effect of Dexmedetomidine Hydrochloride on perioperative inflammation and postoperative lung infection in patients with spinal tuberculosis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsRegional analgesic techniques are difficult to use in tubercular spine patients due to distorted spinal anatomy and presence of infection. This study was conducted with the aim to evaluate analgesic efficacy of local wound infiltration before wound closure in tubercular spine patients.
methodsThis pilot randomised double-blind controlled study was conducted in 32 American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III patients, age ≥15 years, undergoing elective surgery for spinal tuberculosis. All the patients received general anaesthesia using standard technique and intravenous morphine for intraoperative analgesia. They received wound infiltration with either normal saline (group C) or local infiltration analgesia with 0.375% ropivacaine 3 mg/kg, adrenaline 5 μg/mL and dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg in a total volume of 0.8 mL/kg (group LIA) before wound closure. Patient-controlled analgesia using intravenous morphine provided postoperative analgesia. The primary objective was to study 24-h morphine consumption, whereas the secondary objectives included pain scores, complications and patient satisfaction. Repeated measures analysis of variance, Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney
resultsMorphine requirement was lower in group LIA (6.7 ± 2.7 mg) than in group C (27.7 ± 7.9 mg);P < 0.001. Group LIA also had lower pain scores (
conclusionWound infiltration with ropivacaine, adrenaline and dexmedetomidine before wound closure provided good postoperative analgesia with lower morphine requirement.
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.