SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024
Dexmedetomidine with different concentrations added to local anesthetics in erector spinae plane block: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- Comparison of analgesic efficacy of ropivacaine versus ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine in modified thoracolumbar interfascial plane block in patients undergoing lumbar disc surgeries: A randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- The Application of Erector Spinae Plane Block in Chronic Pain Management: From Anatomical Mechanisms to Clinical Innovations.Journal of pain research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dexmedetomidine has been used as a perineural local anesthetic (LA) adjuvant to facilitate the potency of erector spinal plane block (ESPB). This quantitative review aimed to evaluate whether perineural dexmedetomidine for ESPB can improve the effects of analgesia compared to LA alone. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the addition of dexmedetomidine to LA compared to LA alone in ESPB were included. The pain scores, duration of sensory block, the time to first analgesia requirement, postoperative morphine consumption, rescue analgesia, and dexmedetomidine-related side effects were analyzed and combined using random-effects models. Results: A total of 823 patients from 13 RCTs were analyzed. Dexmedetomidine was used at the concentration of 0.5 μg/kg in three trials and 1 μg/kg in nine trials, and both in one trial. Both concentrations of dexmedetomidine perineurally administrated significantly reduced the rest VAS scores postoperatively at 12 h (0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine: MD = -0.86; 95% CI: -1.59 to -0.12; Conclusion: The meta-analysis showed that using perineural dexmedetomidine at either 0.5 μg/kg or 1 μg/kg doses in ESPB can effectively and safely enhance pain relief. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO (CRD42023424532: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).
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.