ArticleGynecology and minimally invasive therapy
Does Local Infiltration of Anesthesia Reduce Port-site Pain in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries? A Pilot Study.
Article in Gynecology and minimally invasive therapy. 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.
- Diaphragmatic breathing for referred pain after total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized clinical trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- Effect of port-site and intraperitoneal local anesthetic injection versus placebo on postoperative pain and recovery after gynecologic laparoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the visual analog scale (VAS) score in patients receiving port-site bupivacaine infiltration in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries and to compare it with those receiving placebo and to evaluate the additional analgesic requirement in the first 24 h after surgery. Materials and Methods: A prospective interventional study was conducted on 60 women scheduled for benign gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. Patients were randomized into two groups using an alternative sequential method of allocation. Approval from the Institute's Ethics Committee was sought. Informed written consent was taken from all the patients. All laparoscopic surgeries were performed under general anesthesia. Double-blinding was done. A VAS with a 10 cm vertical score ranging from "no pain" to "worst possible pain" was used to assess the postoperative pain when the patient awakened in the operating room (2 h after surgery), then after 6 and 24 h. The primary outcome measured was pain perception by the patient (as VAS scores), and the secondary outcome was the need for additional analgesia. Results: Comparison of both groups with the VAS score shows Conclusion: The local infiltration of bupivacaine does not significantly reduce the port-site postoperative pain in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries.
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.