ArticleCureus2023
Comparison of Ropivacaine Plus Dexmedetomidine and Ropivacaine Plus Magnesium Sulfate Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spine Surgeries.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and impact of intravenous magnesium sulfate in spinal surgery systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- The impact of ropivacaine local infiltration in multimodal analgesia on early functional recovery and safety in elderly patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Magnesium Sulfate in Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute pain after lumbar spine surgery is due to soft tissue and muscle separation at the operation site. Local anesthetic wound infiltration is a safe and effective method for postoperative analgesia following lumbar spine surgery. In this study, we aimed to investigate and compare the efficacy of ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine and ropivacaine plus magnesium sulfate for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgeries. MATERIALS AND
methodThis prospective randomized study was conducted on 60 patients, aged between 18 and 65 years, either sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I and II patients scheduled for single-level lumbar laminectomy. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups 30 patients each. Twenty to 30 minutes before skin closure and after hemostasis was achieved, the surgeon infiltrated 10 mL of study drugs into paravertebral muscles on each side. Group A received 20 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine and group B received 20 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine plus magnesium sulfate. Postoperative pain was assessed by the visual analog scale at 0 minute (immediately after extubation), 30 minutes, 1st hour, 2nd hour, and thereafter at 4th hour, 6th hour, 12th hour, and 24th hour. Time to rescue analgesia, total analgesic consumption, hemodynamic variables, and complications if any were recorded. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 20.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.).
resultsThe time to first requirement of analgesia in postoperative period was significantly longer in group A (10.05 ± 1.62 hours) than in group B (8.07 ± 1.83 hours) (p < 0.001). Total analgesic consumption was significantly higher in group B (197.50 ± 36.76 mL) compared to group A (142.50 ± 22.88 mL) (p < 0.001). Heart rate and mean arterial pressure were significantly lower in group A compared to group B (p < 0.05).
conclusionLocal infiltration of surgical site with ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine provided better pain control than ropivacaine plus magnesium sulphate infiltration and is safe and effective analgesia for patients undergoing lumbar spine surgeries in postoperative period.
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.