Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026463›Full record

ReviewJournal of pain research2023

Regional Analgesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Narrative Review Toward Enhancing Outcomes in Parturients.

Matthew Silverman, Nicholas Zwolinski, Ethan Wang, Nishita Lockwood, Michael Ancuta, Evan Jin, Jinlei Li

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pain research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07137208 (Bilevel Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Analgesia After Cesarean Delivery Under Spinal Anesthesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07137208 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Bilevel Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Analgesia After Cesarean Delivery Under Spinal Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMansoura UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled90ConditionsCesarean Section WoundArmsESP block, TAP Block, Bupivacaine injection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical Efficacy of Single-Journal of pain research · 2025
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew SilvermanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Nicholas ZwolinskiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Ethan WangYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Nishita LockwoodDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Michael AncutaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Evan JinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Jinlei LiDepartment of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4026-2569
Yale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: With the current surge on peripheral nerve blocks in post-cesarean pain management and the historical lack of unequivocal evidence supporting its universal use, this review intended to re-examine the extended scope of literature on regional anesthesia and postoperative analgesia in low-transverse cesarean section. Methods: A literature search was conducted up to April 2023 using PubMed to identify articles relevant to our search words "cesarean section", "neuraxial morphine", "post-cesarean analgesia", as well as the name of each individual nerve block. The literature search was ultimately narrowed to systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials published between 2012 and 2023. We define, describe, and discuss the evidence surrounding each individual regional anesthetic technique in the presence and absence of intrathecal morphine, which is used as the gold standard when appropriate. Results: In the absence of neuraxial morphine, all regional anesthetic techniques have some level of analgesic benefit in the post-cesarean analgesia. Transversus Abdominis Plane blocks continue to have the most studies in their use. Newer fascia plane blocks including the anterior Quadratus Lumborum, and Erector Spinae Plane blocks provide significant analgesia. In addition, direct comparison among peripheral nerve blocks consistently favors the more proximal, centralized techniques. Conversely, in the presence of neuraxial morphine, no peripheral anesthetic technique has reliably and reproducibly demonstrated an added analgesic benefit regardless of the peripheral nerve block technique or location of local anesthetic injection in the post-cesarean population. Conclusion: Neuraxial morphine continues to be the gold standard for post-cesarean section analgesia, the benefit of additional single injection regional anesthetic is currently not evidence supported. In cases where neuraxial opioids have not or cannot be given, there is overwhelming evidence that regional anesthetic techniques improve post-cesarean section analgesia and decrease post-operative opioid consumption. Even though there is no consensus on the optimal peripheral nerve block, emerging evidence suggests more centralized abdominal fascia plane block trends towards better analgesia.

Indexed as

cesarean sectionerector spinae plane blockneuraxial morphineperipheral nerve blockquadratus lumborum blocktransversus abdominis plane block

Identifiers

PMID38026463
PMCPMC10644837
OpenAlexW4388539479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.