Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34268624›Full record

ArticleJournal of anesthesia2021

Comparison of the analgesic effects continuous epidural anesthesia and continuous rectus sheath block in patients undergoing gynecological cancer surgery: a non-inferiority randomized control trial.

Hideki Kuniyoshi, Yu Yamamoto, Shohei Kimura, Takanori Hiroe, Takako Terui, Yoichi Kase

Registry-linked trialAbstract readEquivalence Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06244732 (Post-Operative Pain Control After Aortic EndoaneurYsmEctomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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.

NCT06244732 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Post-Operative Pain Control After Aortic EndoaneurYsmEctomy

TypeinterventionalSponsorIRCCS Policlinico S. DonatoRan2024 to 2027Enrolled60ConditionsPostoperative Pain, Abdominal Aortic AneurysmArmsPostoperative pain control
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy of locoregional analgesic techniques after laparotomy for gynecologic cancer: a systematic review.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hideki KuniyoshiDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yu YamamotoDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shohei KimuraDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takanori HiroeDepartment of Biostatistics, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan.
Takako TeruiDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoichi KaseDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. y.kase@jikei.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1187-4769
Jikei University School of Medicine · JPKyoto University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe investigated the non-inferiority of continuous rectus sheath block to continuous epidural anesthesia for postoperative analgesia of gynecological cancer patients.

methodsOne hundred ASA-PS 1-2 patients via a median incision up to 5 cm above the navel were randomized into a continuous epidural anesthesia (CEA) group and a continuous rectus sheath block (CRSB) group. Following surgery, they have controlled with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) as basal postoperative analgesia. For patients in the CEA group were administered 0.25% levobupivacaine at 5 mg/h. Patients in the CRSB group, catheters were inserted on both sides of the posterior rectus sheath after surgery. They received 0.25% levobupivacaine on both sides at 7.5 mg/h. To determine whether CRSB is non-inferior to CEA in postoperative treatment, pain at rest and movement was assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). The non-inferiority margin of NRS difference between CRSB and CEA was set at 1.3 difference in means. The primary outcome was non-inferiority comparisons of NRS at rest/at movement after surgery, while the secondary outcome included the frequency of requesting IV-PCA and rescue drugs.

resultsNRS at rest in the CRSB group was not inferior to that in the CEA group. On the other hand, the NRS at movement at 4, 6, 8, 12 h following surgery in the CRSB group was inferior to CEA. There was no difference in the frequency of requesting IV-PCA and rescue drugs.

conclusionsCRSB showed the non-inferiority to CEA for postoperative analgesia at rest, while CRSB was not non-inferior to CEA at movement in gynecological cancer patients. CRSB would be a substitute when CEA is contraindicated as a component of postoperative multimodal analgesia.

Indexed as

Analgesia, EpiduralAnesthesia, EpiduralNeoplasmsAnalgesia, Patient-ControlledAnalgesics, OpioidFemaleHumansPostoperative PainAnalgesics, OpioidEpidural anesthesiaPostsurgical pain managementRectus sheath block

Identifiers

PMID34268624
OpenAlexW3181143141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.