Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38147123›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023

Laparoscopic transverse abdominis plane block: how I do it and a cost efficiency analysis.

Yuki Hirata, Vijaya Gottumukkala, Jeeva Ajith, Jason A Schmeisser, Elizabeth P Ninan, Jessica E Maxwell, Rebecca A Snyder, Michael P Kim, Hop S Tran Cao, Ching-Wei D Tzeng and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Short-Term Outcomes and Cost of Robotic Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy During the Initial Phase of a Robotic Pancreatectomy Program.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yuki HirataDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Vijaya GottumukkalaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Jeeva AjithFinancial Planning and Analysis, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Jason A SchmeisserFinancial Planning and Analysis, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Elizabeth P NinanDivision of Procedures and Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Jessica E MaxwellDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Rebecca A SnyderDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Michael P KimDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Hop S Tran CaoDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Ching-Wei D TzengDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Brian D BadgwellDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Matthew H G KatzDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Naruhiko IkomaDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. nikoma@mdanderson.org.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine the efficacy and efficiency of laparoscopic transverse abdominis plane block (Lap-TAP) in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy and gastrectomy compared to those of ultrasound-guided TAP (US-TAP).

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the records of patients who underwent open or minimally invasive (MIS) pancreatoduodenectomy and major gastrectomy with the use of Lap-TAP or US-TAP at our institution between November 1, 2018, and September 30, 2021. We compared the estimated time and cost associated with Lap-TAP and US-TAP. We also compared postoperative opioid use and pain scores between patients who underwent open laparotomy with these TAPs.

resultsA total of 194 patients were included. Overall, 114 patients (59%) underwent pancreatectomy, and 80 patients (41%) underwent gastrectomy. Additionally, 138 patients (71%) underwent an open procedure, and 56 patients (29%) underwent MIS. A total of 102 patients (53%) underwent US-TAP, and 92 (47%) underwent Lap-TAP. The median time to skin incision was significantly shorter in the Lap-TAP group (US-TAP, 59 min vs. Lap-TAP, 45 min; P < 0.001), resulting in an estimated reduction in operation cost by $602. Pain scores and postoperative opioid use were similar between Lap-TAP and US-TAP among open surgery patients, indicating equivalent pain control between Lap-TAP and US-TAP.

conclusionLap-TAP was equally effective in pain control as US-TAP after pancreatectomy and gastrectomy, and Lap-TAP can reduce operation time and cost. Lap-TAP is considered the preferred approach for MIS pancreatectomy and gastrectomy, which occasionally needs conversion to laparotomy.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidLaparoscopyAbdominal MusclesGastrectomyHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPainPancreaticoduodenectomyRetrospective StudiesAnalgesics, OpioidGastrectomyMinimally invasive surgeryPancreatectomyTransverse abdominis plane block

Identifiers

PMID38147123
OpenAlexW4390225473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.