ArticleCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie
Rectus sheath catheters reduce opiate use in pancreaticoduodenectomy: a pre- and postintervention cohort study.
Article in Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of the rectus sheath block in modern perioperative care for midline laparotomy: a review of the evidence.Frontiers in anesthesiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPancreaticoduodenectomy is the only curative option for patients with pancreatic cancer; however, pain remains a considerable problem postoperatively. With many centres moving away from using epidural analgesia, there is the need to evaluate alternative opiate sparing techniques for postoperative analgesia. We sought to determine if rectus sheath catheters (RSCs) had an opiate sparing and analgesic effect compared with standard care alone (opiate analgesia).
methodsWe conducted a retrospective pre- and postintervention cohort study of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy at a single tertiary academic hospital in Toronto, Canada, between April 2018 and December 2019. All patients undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy were eligible for inclusion. Among the 101 patients identified, 84 (61 control, 23 RSCs) were analyzed after exclusion criteria were applied (epidural analgesia, admission to intensive care intubated or reintubated within the first 96 hours). The pre-intervention group received a semi-standardized course of analgesics, including intravenous hydromorphone, acetaminophen, ketamine, with or without nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory, and with or without intravenous lidocaine; the latter 2 drugs were at the individual anesthesiologist and surgeon's preference. For the postintervention group, the same course of analgesics were used, with the addition of RSCs. These were inserted at the end of the operation, with a loading dose of ropivacaine administered and followed by a programmed intermittent bolus regime for 72-96 hours. The primary outcome measure was total postoperative opiate consumption (oral morphine equivalents). Secondary outcomes included pain scores (numeric rating scale) and treatment-related adverse effects.
resultsOpiate consumption (oral morphine equivalents) at 96 hours was significantly lower (median 188 mg, interquartile range [IQR] 112-228 v. 242.4 mg, IQR 166.8-352) with and without RSC, respectively (
conclusionThe use of RSCs was associated with significant reductions in postoperative opiate consumption. Given the ease of placement and management, with minimal complications, RSCs should be incorporated into a course of postoperative multimodal analgesia. A large scale randomized controlled trial should be conducted to further investigate these findings.
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.