Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35918638›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2022

Analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (espb) in general anesthesia for cesarean section: a randomized controlled trial.

Jia Hu, Qi Chen, Qian Xu, Yun Song, Ke Wei, Xiao-Feng Lei

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
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jia Hu *Department of Anesthesiology, Woman and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Qi Chen *Department of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Qian XuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Woman and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Yun SongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Woman and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Ke WeiDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Xiao-Feng LeiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Woman and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China. 13495926509@qq.com.
Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CNChongqing Medical University · CNChongqing Maternal and Child Health Hospital · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe analgesic effects of erector spinae plane block in general anesthesia for cesarean section and recovery from puerperae remain unclear.

methodsSixty patients with contraindications for spinal anesthesia who required general anesthesia for cesarean section were enrolled and randomly divided into the erector spinal plane block (ESPB) combined with the general anesthesia group (group E) and general anesthesia group (group G). Group E received bilateral ESPB (20 ml of 0.25% ropivacaine on each side) under ultrasound guidance 30 min before general anesthesia. The primary outcomes were the number of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) boluses, and Bruggemann comfort scale (BCS) scores at 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after operation. The second outcome was intraoperative anesthesia dosage, fetal delivery time, puerperae emergence time, visual analog scale (VAS) at 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after operation, and incidence of nausea and vomiting. Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded 10 min before the start of anesthesia (T0), at the induction of anesthesia (T1), at skin incision (T2), and fetal delivery (T3), and immediately after surgery (T4).

resultsThe number of PCIA boluses was lower in group E than in group G (P < 0.001). The BCS score increased at 2 h and 6 h after the operation in group E (P < 0.05), while the VAS score significantly decreased in group E at the same time (P < 0.05). Compared with group G, the doses of propofol and remifentanil were significantly decreased in group E (P < 0.001), the emergence time of puerperae was shortened (P = 0.003), and the incidence of nausea and vomiting was significantly decreased (P = 0.014).

conclusionUltrasound-guided ESPB applied to general anesthesia for a cesarean section can significantly reduce the required dose of general anesthetic drugs, shorten the recovery time of the puerperae, and improve postoperative analgesia.

trial registrationwww. CLINICALTRIALS: gov under the number ChiCTR2200056337 (04-02-2022).

Indexed as

Nerve BlockAnalgesicsAnesthesia, GeneralCesarean SectionFemaleHumansNauseaPostoperative PainPregnancyUltrasonography, InterventionalVomitingAnalgesicsCesarean sectionErector spinae plane blockGeneral anesthesiaUltrasound-guided

Identifiers

PMID35918638
PMCPMC9344714
OpenAlexW4289523887

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.