Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39618576›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Enhancing Postoperative Analgesia After Cesarean Section: Insights Into Transversus Abdominis Plane Block, Intrathecal Opioids, and Other Analgesic Techniques.

Salah N El-Tallawy, Joseph V Pergolizzi, Haneen F Amlih, Moaaz M Fairaq, Fouad I Awaleh, Abdullah T Alsubaie, Issam S Shaheen, Yusra S Al-Kayyal, Rania S Ahmed, Wegdan A Ali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Salah N El-TallawyAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Joseph V PergolizziResearch, NEMA Research, Inc., Naples, USA.
Haneen F AmlihAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Moaaz M FairaqAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Fouad I AwalehAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Abdullah T AlsubaieAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Issam S ShaheenAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Yusra S Al-KayyalAnesthesia, King Khalid University Hospital, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Rania S AhmedObstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, SAU.
Wegdan A AliAnesthesia, Faculty of Medicine, Minia University, Minia, EGY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCesarean section (CS) is associated with moderate to severe pain that may delay recovery and interfere with the mother's ability to take care of the newborn. This clinical study aimed to evaluate different analgesic protocols for postoperative pain management after CS.

methodsThe study included 300 parturients scheduled for CS and classified into five equal groups as follows: general anesthesia (GA group), GA plus transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block (GA+TAP group), spinal anesthesia (SA) plus intrathecal fentanyl (ITF group), SA plus fentanyl + TAP block (ITF+TAP group), and SA plus intrathecal morphine (ITM group). Multimodal analgesia was added to all groups in the form of paracetamol 1 g/6 hours intravenously (IV), lornoxicam (8 mg/8 hours/IV), in addition to rescue opioid analgesia (morphine or oxycodone 4 mg/IV) upon the patient's request. Primary outcomes included pain assessments by numerical rating scale (NRS), worst and least pain scores, and time in maximum pain. Secondary outcomes included time to first request of analgesia, total opioid consumption, patient request for additional analgesia, function, and satisfaction scores. Possible side effects and neonatal Apgar scores were recorded at five and 10 minutes.

resultsThe results showed a significant difference between the study groups regarding pain relief. The best pain relief, lowest worst pain, least pain, and total opioid consumption were reported by the ITM group, followed by ITF+TAP, GA+TAP, then SA, and GA groups (p < 0.05). The lower percentage of time in the worst pain and the longest time to the first request of analgesia were reported with ITM and ITF+TAP groups followed by the ITF group and GA+TAP group. In contrast, the longest time spent in the worst pain and the shortest duration until the first request of analgesia was observed in the GA group (p < 0.05). The best function scores were observed with ITF+TAP and then ITM, while the highest satisfaction scores were reported with ITM, ITF+TAP followed by SA and GA+TAP, and the lowest scores were observed in the GA group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.005, respectively). Side effects such as itching, nausea, and vomiting were significantly higher in the ITM group when compared to the other groups (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the study groups regarding the Apgar scores at five and 10 minutes (p = 0.271 and 0.760).

conclusionsBilateral TAP block has the potential to effectively enhance postoperative analgesia and reduce the need for systemic opioids after both GA and SA. Compared to ITF, ITM provides a higher quality and longer duration of analgesia with minimal analgesic-related side effects. Further studies to find an optimal analgesic protocol with few to no side effects are warranted.

Indexed as

cesarean sectiongeneral anesthesianeuraxial analgesiapostoperative painspinal anesthesiaspinal opioidstransversus abdominis plan block

Identifiers

PMID39618576
PMCPMC11608119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.