SynthesisInternational wound journal2023
The effect of liposomal bupivacaine for surgical wound infiltration: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of liposome bupivacaine in transversus abdominis plane blocks for postoperative analgesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Liposomal bupivacaine versus conventional anesthetics in adductor canal block for total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- The effect of liposomal bupivacaine for surgical wound infiltration: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
- The effect of bupivacaine on analgesia and safety in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- [Comparative observation of analgesic efficacy between liposomal bupivacaine and "cocktail" therapy following artificial intelligence-assisted direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: A prospective randomized controlled study].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Trial
- Liposomal bupivacaine in lower extremity arthroplasty: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- RETRACTION: The Effect of Liposomal Bupivacaine for Surgical Wound Infiltration: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.International wound journal · 2025Article
- A Review of Current Literature of Interest to the Office-Based Anesthesiologist.Anesthesia progress · 2024Article
- The Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Retracted
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has consistently been considered a potential analgesic for surgical wound infiltration. However, the evidence of its analgesic effectiveness remains unclear. In this meta-analysis, we attempted to identify the potential clinical role of LB wound infiltration in different surgical procedures. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LB with non-liposomal local anaesthetics and placebos were retrieved from six electronic databases. The primary outcome was cumulative morphine equivalent consumption within 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery. Approximately 2659 patients from 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to the control, LB-wound infiltration did not reduce the postoperative morphine consumption at 24 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.60 mg; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -2.78 to 1.59 mg; P = 0.54), 48 hours (WMD, -1.00 mg; 97.5% CI, -3.23 to 1.24; P = 0.32) or 72 hours (WMD, 0.50 mg; 97.5% CI, -0.67 to 1.67; P = 0.33). Similarly, secondary outcome analysis did not reveal any additional benefits of LB in any other pain-related outcomes. LB was not associated with any adverse effects. Overall, LB does not appear to improve the postoperative analgesic, rehabilitation, or safety outcomes. Current evidence does not support the routine use of LB for wound infiltration following surgical procedures.
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.