Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2022
Combination of thoracic epidural analgesia with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia versus traditional thoracic epidural analgesia for postoperative analgesia and early recovery of laparotomy: a prospective single-centre, 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effective Thoracoabdominal Pain Management Using Dual Epidural Catheter Placement in Esophageal Reconstruction: A Case Report.Reports (MDPI) · 2025Article
- Prospective Survey of Postoperative Pain in Japan: A Multicenter, Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Chemical components of Fu brick tea and its potential preventive effects on metabolic syndrome.Food science & nutrition · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has always been the first choice for postoperative pain treatment, but associated complications and contraindications may limit its use. Our study put forward a new analgesic strategy that combines TEA with patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) to optimize TEA.
methodsPatients undergoing laparotomy were enrolled in this prospective randomized study. Patients were randomized to one of two groups: TEA/PCIA group and TEA group. Patients in TEA/PCIA group received TEA in the day of surgery and the first postoperative day and PCIA continued to use until the third postoperative day. Patients in TEA group received TEA for three days postoperatively. Visual analogue scale (VSA) pain scores at rest and on movement at 6, 24,48,72 h after surgery were recorded. In addition, the incidence of inadequate analgesia, adverse events, time to first mobilization, time to pass first flatus, time of oral intake recovery, time of urinary catheter removal, postoperative length of hospital stay, cumulative opioid consumption, and the overall cost were compared between the two groups. We examined VAS pain scores using repeated measures analysis of variance; P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
resultsEighty-six patients were analysed (TEA/PCIA = 44, TEA = 42). The mean VAS pain scores at rest and on movement in TEA/PCIA group were lower than TEA group, with a significant difference on movement and 48 h postoperatively (P < 0.05). The time to first mobilization and pass first flatus were shorter in TEA/PCIA group (P < 0.05). Other measurement showed no statistically significant differences.
conclusionsThe combination of TEA with PCIA for patients undergoing laparotomy, can enhance postoperative pain control and facilitate early recovery without increasing the incidence of adverse effects and overall cost of hospitalization.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry( www.chictr.org.cn ), ChiCTR 1,800,020,308, 13 December 2018.
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.