SynthesisMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2020
Efficacy of Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetics on Pain Control During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Local anesthetics versus systemic analgesics for reducing pain during Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL): A systematic review and meta-analysis.Turkish journal of urology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The efficacy of a eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) for pain control in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of EMLA cream on pain control during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. MATERIAL AND METHODS We searched Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify relevant randomized controlled trials that compared the pain control efficacies of EMLA vs. placebo. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: Randomized controlled trials that compared the effect of EMLA with placebo cream for patients underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Two review authors extracted data independently using a designed data extraction form and risk of bias by Cochrane Collaboration's tool. RESULTS Nine studies, including 10 randomized controlled trials with 1167 patients, were eligible. The EMLA group experienced less pain (mean difference, -0.47; 95% confidence interval, -0.78 to -0.16; p=0.003) and shorter duration of lithotripsy (mean difference, -1.70, 95% confidence interval: -2.31 to -1.10, p<0.0001) than the placebo group. There were no significant differences in the number of patients who needed extra intravenous medication (p=0.610), number of patients with insufficient extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy pain control (p=0.530), and number of patients with opioid adverse effects (p=0.320). Limitations: Long interval between the studies, different kinds of lithotripters. CONCLUSIONS EMLA can reduce pain during the ESWL procedure.
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.