Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32872752›Full record

ArticleAsian spine journal2021

Wound Infiltration with Levobupivacaine, Ketorolac, and Adrenaline for Postoperative Pain Control after Spinal Fusion Surgery.

Valerio Pace, Arif Gul, Varadarajan Prakash, Chang Park, Giacomo Placella, Geoffrey Raine

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian spine journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Valerio PaceDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
Arif GulDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK.
Varadarajan PrakashDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK.
Chang ParkDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK.
Giacomo PlacellaDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Geoffrey RaineDepartment of Anaesthetics, The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK.
Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust · GBIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITRoyal National Orthopaedic Hospital · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designThis study enrolled patients in from a single center who underwent primary spinal fusion procedure and divided them into two groups (group-control study). PURPOSE: Good local infiltration can reduce postoperative analgesic requirements and enable expedited discharge. Administration of a combination of levobupivacaine (200 mg/100 mL, 0.9% normal saline), ketorolac (30 mg), and adrenaline (0.5 mg) as a wound infiltrate is recommended at an optimum combination. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: There is currently no consensus on the optimum intraoperative local infiltration of spinal surgery patients undergoing operative fusion.

methodsPatients who were enrolled in two spinal centers (over 24 months) undergoing primary spinal fusion procedures were allocated into two groups, comparing the type of local infiltration used at the time of the procedure. Group 1 received the combination of levobupivacaine (200 mg), ketorolac (30 mg), and adrenaline (0.5 mg), while group 2 received other types of local anesthetics. Primary outcome measures include patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) use, morphine consumption, and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcome measure are as follows: days of physiotherapy, pain score, side effects, and complications.

resultsThere are a total of 140 patients enrolled. Seventy-five patients enrolled were allocated to group 1, receiving the study combination, and 65 patients were assigned in group 2, receiving other local infiltrations. All primary outcome measures (consumption of morphine, use of PCA, and length of stay) were significantly higher in group 2 than the study combination (p<0.05). The secondary outcomes of pain scores and days of physiotherapy values were also significantly higher in group 2 (p<0.05). Patient satisfaction questionnaires gave significantly better results in group 1 (p<0.05). There were no significant statistical differences with regard to any postoperative complications between the two groups.

conclusionsOur data suggest that the studied wound infiltration is a safe and feasible option that could provide good postoperative pain control without significant side effects. It also allowed to reduce dependence of opioids and PCA, earlier postoperative mobilization, lower pain scores postoperatively, and reduced hospital stay.

Indexed as

Pain controlPain scoresPostoperative managementSpinal fusionSpinal surgeryWound infiltration

Identifiers

PMID32872752
PMCPMC8377213
OpenAlexW3081855265

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.