Trial reportAnaesthesiology intensive therapy2022
Efficacy of type-I and type-II pectoral nerve blocks (PECS I and II) in patients undergoing mastectomy: a prospective randomised clinical trial.
Trial report in Anaesthesiology intensive therapy, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The MECDrug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Ultrasound-Guided Pectoral Nerve Block for Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Implantation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Postprocedural Analgesic Benefit in an Asian Population.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Pectoral Nerve-2 Block (PECS 2) in Breast Cancer Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Regional anesthesia in breast surgery: An Italian expert consensus - Part 2: Results from a network meta-analysis evaluating 103 randomized controlled trials on regional anesthesia techniques for mastectomy with or without axillary clearance.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe benefits of type I/II pectoral nerve blocks (PECS I/II), which can be dose dependent, have been examined in different studies. Nonetheless, few randomised trials have been performed in South America. The present randomised trial examined the efficacy of PECS I/II with a higher dose of the local anaesthetic to manage perioperative pain after mastectomy in Brazil. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis was a randomised, parallel, single-centre, and single-blind trial. Eighty participants undergoing elective mastectomy were randomised (1 : 1) to receive PECS I/II plus ultrasound-guided ropivacaine (0.5%) or standard general anaesthesia. The primary outcome was pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery, assessed with a numerical rating scale. Haemodynamic outcomes, consumption of opioids, anaesthe-tics and antiemetics, and post-anaesthetic recovery times were also recorded.
resultsSixty participants (75%) completed the study. The mean age was 54 years, with 57% of participants undergoing mastectomy and 43% undergoing quadrantectomy. Median pain intensity (interquartile range) at rest (24 h postoperatively) was lower in the PECS I/II group compared to the control group: 0 (0-1.75) vs. 1 (1-2), P = 0.021. A smaller number of patients in the PECS I/II group required intraoperative fentanyl (23.3% vs. 83.3%; P < 0.001) and postoperative tramadol (20.0 vs. 76.7%; P < 0.001). Mean doses of fentanyl and tramadol were about 4-5 times lower in the PECS I/II group (P < 0.001). PECS I/II significantly reduced sevoflurane consumption during surgery (P = 0.01). No difference was observed regarding adverse effects.
conclusionsPECS I/II blockade with high-dose local anaesthetic is efficacious and safe, resulting in lower levels of perioperative pain after mastectomy compared to standard general anaesthesia.
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.