Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34994837›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2022

Analgesia in the Initial Management of Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

Navamayooran Thavanesan, Sophie White, Shiela Lee, Bathiya Ratnayake, Kofi W Oppong, Manu K Nayar, Linda Sharp, Asbjørn Mohr Drewes, Gabriele Capurso, Enrique De-Madaria and 3 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.8field-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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Management of acute pancreatitis in the "no man's land".Internal and emergency medicine · 2025
    Review
  12. Diagnostic and therapeutic management of severe acute pancreatitis. Evidence based medicine (EBM) clinical practice guidelines.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025
    Article
  13. Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pancreatitis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  14. Turkish Society of Gastroenterology: Pancreas Working Group, Acute Pancreatitis Committee Consensus Report.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  15. Observational
  16. Guidelines towards comprehensive care in acute pancreatitis.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Acute Pancreatitis Review.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2023
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 9 institutions in 5 countries.

Navamayooran ThavanesanDepartment of General Surgery, Salisbury Hospital Foundation Trust, Salisbury, UK.
Sophie WhiteDepartment of General Surgery, Royal Hampshire County Hospital, Winchester, UK.
Shiela LeeDepartment of HPB and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Bathiya RatnayakeSurgical and Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Kofi W OppongDepartment of HPB and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Manu K NayarDepartment of HPB and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Linda SharpPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Asbjørn Mohr DrewesDepartment of Gastroenterology, Center for Pancreatic Diseases, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
Gabriele CapursoPancreatico-Biliary Endoscopy and Endosonography Division, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Enrique De-MadariaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante, Spain.
Ajith K SiriwardenaHPB Unit, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK.
John A WindsorSurgical and Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Sanjay PandanaboyanaDepartment of HPB and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. sanjay.pandanaboyana@ncl.ac.uk.
Freeman Hospital · GBNewcastle University · GBUniversity of Auckland · NZAalborg University Hospital · DKHospital General Universitario de Alicante Doctor Balmis · ESIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITManchester Royal Infirmary · GBRoyal Hampshire County Hospital · GBSalisbury NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe optimal analgesic strategy for patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) remains unknown.

objectiveThe present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of different analgesic modalities trialled in AP.

methodsA systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science conducted up until June 2021, identified all randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing analgesic modalities in AP. A pooled analysis was undertaken of the improvement in pain scores as reported on visual analogue scale (VAS) on day 0, day 1 and day 2.

resultsTwelve RCTs were identified including 542 patients. Seven trial drugs were compared: opiates, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), metamizole, local anaesthetic, epidural, paracetamol, and placebo. Across all modalities, the pooled VAS scores showed global improvement from baseline to day 2. Epidural analgesia appears to provide the greatest improvement in VAS within the first 24 h but is equivalent to opiates by 48 h. Within 24 h, NSAIDs offered similar pain-relief to opiates, while placebo also showed equivalence to other modalities but then plateaued. Local anaesthetics demonstrated least overall efficacy. VAS scores for opiate and non-opiate analgesics were comparable at baseline and day 1. The identified RCTs demonstrated significant statistical and methodological heterogeneity in pain-relief reporting.

conclusionsThere is remarkable paucity of level 1 evidence to guide pain management in AP with small datasets per study. Epidural administration appears effective within the first 24 h of AP although infrequently used and featured in only a single RCT. NSAIDs are an effective opiate sparing alternative during the first 24 h.

Indexed as

AnalgesiaOpiate AlkaloidsPancreatitisAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalHumansPainPain ManagementRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthetics, LocalAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalOpiate Alkaloids

Identifiers

PMID34994837
OpenAlexW4206604681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.