Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32087686›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2020

Paravertebral catheter versus EPidural analgesia in Minimally invasive Esophageal resectioN: a randomized controlled multicenter trial (PEPMEN trial).

B F Kingma, W J Eshuis, E M de Groot, M L Feenstra, J P Ruurda, S S Gisbertz, W Ten Hoope, M Marsman, J Hermanides, M W Hollmann and 13 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06563557 (ERASME ULB), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT06563557 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

ERASME ULB: Erasme Randomized Controlled Trial Surveys Hemodynamic Excursions During Esophagectomy - a Double Blind Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorErasme University HospitalRan2024 to 2026Enrolled75ConditionsEsophagectomy, Epidural, Anesthesia, Paravertebral AnesthesiaArmsHemodynamic changes between epidural and paravertebral during esophagectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Analgesia in esophagectomy: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023
    Review
  8. Early mobilization after esophageal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2023
    Article
  9. Efficacy and safety of Extrapleural block in patients with coronary artery disease after thoracoscopic surgery.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

23 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

B F KingmaDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, POBOX 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. b.f.kingma@umcutrecht.nl.
W J EshuisDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
E M de GrootDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, POBOX 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M L FeenstraDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J P RuurdaDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, POBOX 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
S S GisbertzDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
W Ten HoopeDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M MarsmanDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J HermanidesDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M W HollmannDepartment of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
C J KalkmanDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M D P LuyerDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
G A P NieuwenhuijzenDepartment of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
H J ScholtenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
M BuiseDepartment of Anesthesiology, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
M J van DetDepartment of Surgery, Hospital Group Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands.
E A KouwenhovenDepartment of Surgery, Hospital Group Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands.
F van der MeerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hospital Group Twente Almelo, Almelo, The Netherlands.
G W J FrederixDepartment of Public Health, Healthcare Innovation & Evaluation and Medical Humanities, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
E CheongDepartment of Surgery, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK.
K Al NaimiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK.
M I van Berge HenegouwenDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
R van HillegersbergDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, POBOX 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. r.vanhillegersberg@umcutrecht.nl.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLCatharina Ziekenhuis · NLZiekenhuis Groep Twente · NLNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital · GBRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

ZonMw 852002004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThoracic epidural analgesia is the standard postoperative pain management strategy in esophageal cancer surgery. However, paravertebral block analgesia may achieve comparable pain control while inducing less side effects, which may be beneficial for postoperative recovery. This study primarily aims to compare the postoperative quality of recovery between paravertebral catheter versus thoracic epidural analgesia in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy.

methodsThis study represents a randomized controlled superiority trial. A total of 192 patients will be randomized in 4 Dutch high-volume centers for esophageal cancer surgery. Patients are eligible for inclusion if they are at least 18 years old, able to provide written informed consent and complete questionnaires in Dutch, scheduled to undergo minimally invasive esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and an intrathoracic anastomosis, and have no contra-indications to either epidural or paravertebral analgesia. The primary outcome is the quality of postoperative recovery, as measured by the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire on the morning of postoperative day 3. Secondary outcomes include the QoR-40 questionnaire score Area Under the Curve on postoperative days 1-3, the integrated pain and systemic opioid score and patient satisfaction and pain experience according to the International Pain Outcomes (IPO) questionnaire, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, the groups will be compared regarding the need for additional rescue medication on postoperative days 0-3, technical failure of the pain treatment, duration of anesthesia, duration of surgery, total postoperative fluid administration day 0-3, postoperative vasopressor and inotrope use, length of urinary catheter use, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, chronic pain at six months after surgery, and other adverse effects. DISCUSSION: In this study, it is hypothesized that paravertebral analgesia achieves comparable pain control while causing less side-effects such as hypotension when compared to epidural analgesia, leading to shorter postoperative length of stay on a monitored ward and superior quality of recovery. If this hypothesis is confirmed, the results of this study can be used to update the relevant guidelines on postoperative pain management for patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy.

trial registrationNetherlands Trial Registry, NL8037. Registered 19 September 2019.

Indexed as

Analgesia, EpiduralCatheterizationEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPain ManagementPostoperative PainAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnalgesics, OpioidEquivalence Trials as TopicFemaleHumansLength of StayAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID32087686
PMCPMC7036230
OpenAlexW3010825339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.