Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32586361›Full record

ArticleTrials2020

Transmuscular quadratus lumborum (TQL) block for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: study protocol for a double-blind, prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Steve Coppens, Steffen Rex, Steffen Fieuws, Arne Neyrinck, Andre D'Hoore, Geertrui Dewinter

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Steve CoppensDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospitals of the KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. Steve.coppens@uzleuven.be.
Steffen RexDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospitals of the KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Steffen FieuwsInteruniversity Institute for Biostatistics and Statistical Bioinformatics, KU Leuven-University of Leuven & Universiteit Hasselt, Kapucijnenvoer 35, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Arne NeyrinckDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospitals of the KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Andre D'HooreDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, KU Leuven-University Hospitals of Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Geertrui DewinterDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Hospitals of the KU Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

BARA BARA board 2019
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThoracic epidural anesthesia is no longer considered the gold standard for perioperative analgesia in laparoscopic colorectal procedures. In the search for alternatives, the efficacy of the transverse abdominal plane (TAP) block and other abdominal wall blocks such as the transmuscular quadratus lumborum (TQL) block continues to be investigated for postoperative pain management. Most of the initial studies on TAP blocks reported positive effects; however, the amount of studies with negative outcomes is increasing, most probably due to the fact that the majority of abdominal wall blocks fail to mitigate visceral pain. The TQL block could prove attractive in the search for better postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. In several cadaveric studies of the TQL, a spread of dye into the thoracic paravertebral space, the intercostal spaces, and even the thoracic sympathetic trunk was reported. Given the advantage of possibly reaching the thoracic paravertebral space, the potential to reach nerves transmitting visceral pain, and the possible coverage of dermatomes T4-L1, we hypothesize that the TQL provides superior postoperative analgesia for laparoscopic colorectal surgery as compared to patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine alone. METHODS AND

designIn this prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial, 150 patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery will be included. Patients will be randomly allocated to two different analgesic strategies: a bilateral TQL with 30 ml ropivacaine 0.375% each on both sides, administered before induction of anesthesia, plus postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine (TQL group, n = 75), or a bilateral TQL block with 30 ml saline each on both sides plus postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine (placebo group, n = 75). Our primary outcome parameter will be the morphine consumption during the first 24 h postsurgery. Secondary endpoints include pain intensity as assessed with the numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain, time to return of intestinal function (defined as the time to first flatus and the time to the first postoperative intake of solid food), time to first mobilization, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting during the first 24 h, length of stay on the post anesthesia care unit (PACU) and in the hospital, the extent of sensory block at two time points (admission to and discharge from the PACU), the doses of morphine IV as requested by the patient from the PCA pump, the total dosage of morphine administered IV, the need for and dose of rescue analgesics (ketamine, clonidine), free plasma ropivacaine levels after induction and at discharge from the PACU, and the incidence of adverse events during treatment (in particular, signs of local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST)). Epidural analgesia is no longer the standard of care for postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Until now, the most effective analgesic strategy in these patients especially in an enhanced recovery program is still unknown. Several abdominal wall blocks (TAP, fascia transversalis plane block) are known to have an analgesic effect only on somatic pain. Recognizing the importance of procedure-specific pain management, we aim to investigate whether a transmuscular quadratus lumborum block delivers superior pain control in comparison to patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine alone.

trial registrationEudraCT identifier 2019-002304-40. Registered on 17 September 2019.

Indexed as

Colorectal SurgeryAbdominal MusclesAnalgesia, Patient-ControlledAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalDouble-Blind MethodHumansLaparoscopyMorphineNerve BlockPain ManagementPain MeasurementPostoperative Nausea and VomitingPostoperative PainProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalMorphineRopivacaineColorectal surgeryPostoperative painTransmuscular quadratus lumborum block

Identifiers

PMID32586361
PMCPMC7318447
OpenAlexW3037650165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.