Trial reportBJS open2022
A comparison between thoracic epidural analgesia and rectus sheath catheter analgesia after open midline major abdominal surgery: randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rectus sheath catheters versus thoracic epidural analgesia for pain management after open surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Liposomal Bupivacaine Incisional Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia After Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- An update on the role of multimodal analgesia in perioperative pain management.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2026Review
- Predicting conversion to tailor patient expectations and perioperative pain management in ileocecal resection for Crohn's disease.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Enhancing postoperative pain control by surgically-initiated rectus sheath block in abdominal aortic aneurysm open repair: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- Single-shot liposomal bupivacaine in place of rectus sheath catheters to provide non-opiate analgesia after laparotomy: a quality improvement project to reduce the need for ongoing nursing input.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRectus sheath catheter analgesia (RSCA) and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) are both used for analgesia following laparotomy. The aim was to compare the analgesic effectiveness of RSCA with TEA after laparotomy for elective colorectal and urological surgery.
methodsPatients undergoing elective midline laparotomy were randomized in a non-blinded fashion to receive RSCA or TEA for postoperative analgesia at a single UK teaching hospital. The primary quantitative outcome measure was dynamic pain score at 24 h after surgery. A nested qualitative study (reported elsewhere) explored the dual primary outcome of patient experience and acceptability. Secondary outcome measures included rest and movement pain scores over 72 h, functional analgesia, analgesia satisfaction, opiate consumption, functional recovery, morbidity, safety, and cost-effectiveness.
resultsA total of 131 patients were randomized: 66 in the RSCA group and 65 in the TEA group. The median (interquartile range; i.q.r.) dynamic pain score at 24 h was significantly lower after TEA than RSCA (33 (11-60) versus 50.5 (24.50-77.25); P = 0.018). Resting pain score at 72 h was significantly lower after RSCA (4.5 (0.25-13.75) versus 12.5 (2-13); P = 0.019). Opiate consumption on postoperative day 3 (median (i.q.r.) morphine equivalent 17 (10-30) mg versus 40 (13.25-88.50) mg; P = 0.038), hypotension, or vasopressor dependency (29.7 versus 49.2 per cent; P = 0.023) and weight gain to day 3 (median (i.q.r.) 0 (-1-2) kg versus 1 (0-3) kg; P = 0.046) were all significantly greater after TEA, compared with RSCA. There were no significant differences between groups in other secondary outcomes, although more participants experienced serious adverse events after TEA compared with RSCA, which was also the more cost-effective.
conclusionsTEA provided superior initial postoperative analgesia but only for the first 24 h. By 72 hours RSCA provides superior analgesia, is associated with a lower incidence of unwanted effects, and may be more cost-effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.