ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Comparison of analgesic effects of percutaneous and transthoracic intercostal nerve block in video-assisted thoracic surgery: a propensity score-matched study.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective observational study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of transthoracic intercostal nerve block (TINB) and percutaneous intercostal nerve block (PINB) for video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) using a retrospective analysis.
methodsA total of 336 patients who underwent VATS between January 2021 and June 2022 were reviewed retrospectively. Of the participants, 194 received TINB and were assigned to the T group, while 142 patients received PINB and were assigned to the P group. Both groups received 25 ml of ropivacaine via TINB or PINB at the end of the surgery. The study measured opioid consumption, pain scores, analgesic satisfaction, and safety. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize selection bias due to nonrandom assignment.
resultsAfter propensity score matching, 86 patients from each group were selected for analysis. The P group had significantly lower cumulative opioid consumption than the T group (p < 0.01). The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were lower for the P group than the T group at 6 and 12 h post-surgery (p < 0.01); however, there was no significant difference in the scores between the two groups at 3, 24, and 48 h (p > 0.05). The analgesic satisfaction in the P group was higher than in the T group (p < 0.05). The incidence of back pain, nausea or vomiting, pruritus, dizziness, and skin numbness between the two groups was statistically insignificant (p > 0.05).
conclusionThe study suggests that PINB provides superior analgesia for patients undergoing thoracic surgery compared to TINB without any extra adverse effects.
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.