Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2022
Impact of self-coiling catheters for continuous popliteal sciatic block on postoperative pain level and dislocation rate: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Multimodal pain management in foot and ankle surgery and trauma: a narrative review.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Review
- Article
- Minimizing risk of iatrogenic nerve injury during peroneus longus tendon autograft harvest: a cadaveric study at different ankle or knee positions.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDislocation of catheters within the tissue is a challenge in continuous regional anesthesia. A novel self-coiling catheter design is available and has demonstrated a lower dislocation rate in a cadaver model. The dislocation rate and effect on postoperative pain of these catheters in vivo has yet to be determined and were the subjects of this investigation.
methodsAfter ethics committee approval 140 patients undergoing elective distal lower limb surgery were enrolled in this prospective randomized controlled trial. Preoperatively, patients were randomly assigned and received either the conventional (n = 70) or self-coiling catheter (n = 70) for ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block in short axis view and by the in-plane approach from lateral to medial. The primary outcome was pain intensity after surgery and on the following three postoperative days. Secondary outcomes investigated were dislocation rate in situ determined by sonography, catheter movement visible from outside, opioid consumption as well as leakage at the puncture site.
resultsAll catheters were successfully inserted. The study population of self-coiling catheters had significantly lower mean numeric rating scale values than the reference cohort on the first (p = 0.01) and second postoperative days (p < 0.01). Sonographic evaluation demonstrated, 42 standard catheters (60%) and 10 self-coiling catheters (14.3%) were dislocated in situ within the first three postoperative days. The externally visible movement of the catheters at insertion site did not differ significantly between groups through the third postoperative day. The opioid consumption was significantly lower in the self-coiling catheter group on the day of surgery and on the second and third postoperative days (p = 0.04, p = 0.03 and p = 0.04, respectively).
conclusionThe self-coiling catheter offers a better postoperative pain control and a lower dislocation rate within the tissue when blocking the popliteal sciatic nerve compared to a conventional catheter. Further trials in large patient cohorts are warranted to investigate the potential beneficial effects of self-coiling catheters for other localisations and other application techniques.
trial registrationThe trial was registered at German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) on 08/04/2020 ( DRKS00020938 , retrospectively registered).
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.