ReviewCureus2022
Analgesic Efficacy of Adjuvant Medications in the Pediatric Caudal Block for Infraumbilical Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Evaluating Caudal Block Enhancements in Pediatric Circumcision: Do Additional Analgesics Make a Difference?Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Trial
- Adjunct Medications for Single-Injection Pediatric Regional Blocks: Implications for Peripheral Nerve Blocks.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Effect of caudal block injection speed on optic nerve sheath diameter in pediatric surgeries: A prospective observational cohort study.Medicine · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Various adjuvants are added to local anesthetics in caudal block to improve analgesia. The comparative analgesic effectiveness and relative rankings of these adjuvants are unknown. This network meta-analysis (NMA) sought to evaluate the comparative analgesic efficacy and relative ranking of caudal adjuvants added to local anesthetics (versus local anesthetics alone) in pediatric infra-umbilical surgery. We searched the United States National Library of Medicine database (MEDLINE), PubMed, and Excerpta Medica database (Embase) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing caudal adjuvants (clonidine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, magnesium, morphine, fentanyl, tramadol, dexamethasone, and neostigmine) among themselves, or to no adjuvant (control). We performed a frequentist NMA and employed Cochrane's 'Risk of Bias' tool to evaluate study quality. We chose the duration of analgesia (defined as 'the time from caudal injection to the time of rescue analgesia') as our primary outcome. We also assessed the number of analgesic dose administrations and total dose of acetaminophen within 24 h. The duration of analgesia [87 randomized control trials (RCTs), 5285 patients] was most prolonged by neostigmine [mean difference: 513 min, (95% confidence interval, CI: 402, 625)]. Dexmedetomidine reduced the frequency of analgesic dose administrations within 24 h [29 RCTs, 1765 patients; -1.2 dose (95% CI: -1.6, -0.9)] and the total dose of acetaminophen within 24 h [18 RCTs, 1156 patients; -350 mg (95% CI: -467, -232)] the most. Among caudal adjuvants, neostigmine (moderate certainty), tramadol (low certainty), and dexmedetomidine (low certainty) prolonged the duration of analgesia the most. Dexmedetomidine also reduced the analgesic frequency and consumption more than other caudal adjuvants (moderate certainty).
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.