Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35842610›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2022

Effects of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block with dexmedetomidine combined with ropivacaine of the same dose and different concentrations on analgesic effect and rehabilitation quality of patients undergoing thoracoscopic wedge resection of the lung: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

Chunfang Jian, Yi Shen, Hangxiang Fu, Lizhen Yu

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chunfang JianDepartment of Anesthesiology, Longyan First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Jiuyi North Road, Xinluo District, Longyan, 364000, Fujian, China.
Yi ShenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Longyan First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Jiuyi North Road, Xinluo District, Longyan, 364000, Fujian, China.
Hangxiang FuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Longyan First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Jiuyi North Road, Xinluo District, Longyan, 364000, Fujian, China.
Lizhen YuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Longyan First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Jiuyi North Road, Xinluo District, Longyan, 364000, Fujian, China. lysdyyyyulizhen@126.com.
First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University · CNFujian Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the analgesic effect and rehabilitation quality of patients undergoing thoracoscopic wedge resection of the lung under erector spinae plane (ESP) block with dexmedetomidine combined with the same dose and different concentrations of ropivacaine.

methodsSeventy patients undergoing thoracoscopic wedge resection were randomly divided into groups A (n = 35) and B (n = 35). To perform ESP block, the groups were administered dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg/kg) combined with 30 mL of 0.33% ropivacaine or 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine, respectively, half an hour before general anesthesia induction. We compared the onset time of anesthesia, the block level, and the duration of the block between the two groups. The number of compressions of the analgesic pump within 24 h and 48 h postoperatively and the time of the first compression were noted. The visual analog scale (VAS) scores of static and cough at 0.5 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h postoperatively were noted. Furthermore, the 40-item quality of recovery questionnaire (QoR-40) score was recorded at 24 h postoperatively. In addition, we noted the time taken to get out of the bed for the first time, the length of hospital stay, analgesia satisfaction, and the occurrence of related adverse reactions and complications within 48 h postoperatively.

resultsThe range of ESP block was wider in Group A than in Group B (P < 0.05). Group B had a significantly shorter onset time (P < 0.05) and lower static and cough VAS scores at 6 h and 12 h postoperatively (P < 0.05); this was associated with significantly fewer compressions of the analgesic pump within 24 h and 48 h postoperatively and significantly more time until the first compression of the analgesic pump was required (P < 0.05). Group B was associated with significantly superior QoR-40 scores 24 h postoperatively and significantly shorter time to get out of the bed for the first time than Group A (P < 0.05).

conclusionDexmedetomidine combined with 0.5% ropivacaine for ESP block is better than 0.33% ropivacaine for overall analgesia and postoperative rehabilitation of patients undergoing thoracoscopic wedge resection.

trial registrationChiCTR2200058114 , Date of registration: 30/03/2022.

Indexed as

DexmedetomidineNerve BlockAnesthetics, LocalCoughHumansLungPostoperative PainProspective StudiesRopivacaineUltrasonography, InterventionalAnesthetics, LocalDexmedetomidineRopivacaineDexmedetomidineDifferent concentrationsErector spinae plane blockPostoperative analgesiaRehabilitationRopivacaine

Identifiers

PMID35842610
PMCPMC9288034
OpenAlexW4285587408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.