Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
Comparison of different concentrations of ropivacaine in epidural anesthesia for percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of Safety and Efficacy of Anesthesia Methods in Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis.Pain research & management · 2024Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study investigated the optimal concentration of ropivacaine epidural anesthesia for clinical use in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) by comparing the effects of different concentrations.
methodsSeventy patients scheduled for their first PTED procedure were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive ropivacaine at varying concentrations (0.3% or 0.4%). Primary outcome measures included the numeric rating scale (NRS) and hip extension level (HEL). Secondary outcome measures included intraoperative fentanyl dosage and postoperative complications.
resultsOne patient withdrew due to severe postoperative complications. The remaining 69 patients were allocated to the 0.3% (n = 34) and 0.4% (n = 35) groups, respectively. Baseline characteristics showed no significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05). The NRS score was significantly lower in the 0.4% group than in the 0.3% group (P < 0.01), whereas the HEL score was significantly higher (P < 0.001). The average fentanyl dose in the 0.4% group was significantly lower than that in the 0.3% group (P < 0.01). Postoperative complications occurred in five and two patients in the 0.3% and 0.4% groups, respectively.
conclusionAlthough 0.4% ropivacaine (20 mL) impacts muscle strength, it does not impede PTED surgery. Given its effective analgesic properties and few postoperative complications, 0.4% ropivacaine can be considered a preferred dose for PTED.
trial registrationThis study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR2200060364; Registration Date: 29/5/2022) and on chictr.org.cn ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=171002 ).
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.