Trial reportJournal of pain research2024
Efficacy of Preemptive Topical Lidocaine 5% Plaster in the Prevention of Post-Craniotomy Pain, a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04169854 (Pre-emptive Topical Lidocaine 5% Plaster for Prevention of Post-craniotomy Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Pre-emptive Topical Lidocaine 5% Plaster for Prevention of Post-craniotomy Pain : a Protocol for a Randomized, Triple Blind, Placebo-controlled Trail
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping High-Level Evidence in Neuroanesthesia: A Scoping Review of Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trials in Anesthesia for Neurosurgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Hydrogels and Organogels for Local Anesthetic Delivery: Advances, Challenges, and Translational Perspectives.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Hydrogel-Based Formulations to Deliver Analgesic Drugs: A Scoping Review of Applications and Efficacy.Biomedicines · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The current landscape is characterized by a dearth of effective, safe, simple, and noninvasive methods for preventing pain following craniotomy. This clinical trial seeks to evaluate the efficacy profile of preemptive application of a topical 5% lidocaine patch in alleviating post-craniotomy pain. Methods: This was a multi-centric, prospective randomized placebo-controlled triple-blind clinical trial. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to either the masked intervention group, who received lidocaine 5% white hydrogel plasters (N = 90), or the placebo control group who received plain hydrogel plasters of the same pattern, size, appearance and material as L5Ps, but free of lidocaine (N = 90). Primary outcome was the pain intensity (Visual Analogue Scale at 24 h) after craniotomy. Secondary outcomes included: intra-operative analgesics consumption, pain intensity, cumulative rescue analgesics consumption, sleeping scores, adverse effects such as skin reactions, etc. The intention-to-treat analyses and the per-protocol analyses were used. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in the VAS scores at 24 h after craniotomy (P = 0.539). However, subgroup analysis for female and male patients showed that statistically significant differences were found in VAS scores in male patients (0 [0, 3] in the masked intervention group at 24 h after craniotomy and 3 [1, 4.5] in the placebo control group, P = 0.017). There were no obvious side effects directly associated with preemptive L5P. Conclusion: Preemptive lidocaine 5% plaster as a safe technique was not found to be effective in reducing post-craniotomy pain, but potential gender disparities in the outcomes of this method warrant further investigation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.Gov (NCT04169854).
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.