Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33436442›Full record

ReviewRegional anesthesia and pain medicine2021

Pain management after open liver resection: Procedure-Specific Postoperative Pain Management (PROSPECT) recommendations.

Audrey Dieu, Philippe Huynen, Patricia Lavand'homme, Hélène Beloeil, Stephan M Freys, Esther M Pogatzki-Zahn, Girish P Joshi, Marc Van de Velde, PROSPECT Working Group of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA)

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Regional anesthesia and pain medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Audrey Dieu *Department of Anesthesiology, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Bruxelles, Belgium audrey.dieu@uclouvain.be.ORCID 0000-0002-6026-1734
Philippe Huynen *Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Patricia Lavand'hommeDepartment of Anesthesiology, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Bruxelles, Belgium.
Hélène BeloeilAnesthesia and Intensive Care Department, University of Rennes, CHU Rennes, Inserm, INRA, CIC 1414 NuMeCan, Rennes, France.
Stephan M FreysDepartment of Surgery, DIAKO Ev. Diakonie-Krankenhaus, Bremen, Germany.
Esther M Pogatzki-ZahnDepartment of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Pain Therapy, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Girish P JoshiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Marc Van de VeldeDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium.
PROSPECT Working Group of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA)
Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc · BEEvangelisches Diakoniekrankenhaus · DEInserm · FRKU Leuven · BEThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BEUniversity Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesEffective pain control improves postoperative rehabilitation and enhances recovery. The aim of this review was to evaluate the available evidence and to develop recommendations for optimal pain management after open liver resection using Procedure-Specific Postoperative Pain Management (PROSPECT) methodology. STRATEGY AND SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the English language from January 2010 to October 2019 assessing pain after liver resection using analgesic, anesthetic or surgical interventions were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases.

resultsOf 121 eligible studies identified, 31 RCTs and 3 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Preoperative and intraoperative interventions that improved postoperative pain relief were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, continuous thoracic epidural analgesia, and subcostal transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks. Limited procedure-specific evidence was found for intravenous dexmedetomidine, intravenous magnesium, intrathecal morphine, quadratus lumborum blocks, paravertebral nerve blocks, continuous local anesthetic wound infiltration and postoperative interpleural local anesthesia. No evidence was found for intravenous lidocaine, ketamine, dexamethasone and gabapentinoids.

conclusionsBased on the results of this review, we suggest an analgesic strategy for open liver resection, including acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, combined with thoracic epidural analgesia or bilateral oblique subcostal TAP blocks. Systemic opioids should be considered as rescue analgesics. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm and clarify the efficacy of the recommended analgesic regimen in the context of an enhanced recovery program.

Indexed as

Nerve BlockPain ManagementAnalgesics, OpioidHumansLiverPostoperative PainAnalgesics, Opioidanalgesiapainpain managementpostoperative

Identifiers

PMID33436442
PMCPMC8070600
OpenAlexW3118956189

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.