Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31462806›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2019

Pectoral nerve versus erector spinae block for breast surgeries: A randomised controlled trial.

Chandni Sinha, Amarjeet Kumar, Ajeet Kumar, Chandrakant Prasad, Prashant Kumar Singh, Diti Priya

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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. It is linked to trial NCT05069805 (Comparison of Erector Spinae Plane Block and Pectoral Nerve Block for Acute and Chronic Pain in Mastectomies Outcomes), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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.

NCT05069805 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Erector Spinae Plane Block and Pectoral Nerve Block for Acute and Chronic Pain in Mastectomies Outcomes: a Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital de BaseRan2021 to 2022Enrolled92ConditionsAcute Pain, Chronic Pain, MastectomyArmsPECS II block, ESP block
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

6 authors.

Chandni SinhaDepartment of Anaesthesia, AIIMS, Patna, Bihar, India.
Amarjeet KumarDepartment of Anaesthesia, AIIMS, Patna, Bihar, India.
Ajeet KumarDepartment of Anaesthesia, AIIMS, Patna, Bihar, India.
Chandrakant PrasadDepartment of Neuroanesthesia, C.N Centre, AIIMS, New Delhi, India.
Prashant Kumar SinghDepartment of General Surgery, AIIMS, Patna, Bihar, India.
Diti PriyaDepartment of CFM, AIIMS, Patna, Bihar, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsPatients undergoing breast cancer surgeries face significant post-operative pain. We aimed to compare pectoral nerve (PECS) block with erector spinae (ESP) block in these patients in terms of analgesic efficacy and adverse effects.

methodsSixty four American Society of Anesthesiologists' status I and II female patients between age 18 to 60 years scheduled for unilateral modified radical mastectomy (MRM) under general anaesthesia, were enrolled in this prospective randomised study. Patients in group I received ultrasound guided (USG) ESP block (20 cc 0.2% ropivacaine) while group II received USG guided PECS II block (25 cc 0.2% ropivacaine). General anaesthesia was administered in a standardised manner to both the groups. The various parameters observed included sensory blockade, duration of analgesia and any adverse effects. The primary outcome was the total morphine consumption in 24 hours.

resultsThe total morphine consumption in 24 hours was less in group II (4.40 ± 0.94 mg), compared to group I (6.59 ± 1.35 mg;

conclusionPECS II block is a more effective block when compared to ESP block in patients of MRM in terms of postoperative analgesia and opioid consumption.

Indexed as

Analgesiaerector spinae blockmodified radical mastectomypectoral block

Identifiers

PMID31462806
PMCPMC6691635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.