Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40348992›Full record

SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2025

Intraperitoneal local anesthetics for postoperative pain management following intra-abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mélissa Boulianne, Michael Verret, Sarah O'Connor, Xavier Savard, Xavier Neveu, Camille Marcoux, Olivier Costerousse, Marc-Aurèle Gagnon, Huixin Zhang, Laurence Beaulé and 2 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Mélissa Boulianne *Department of Surgery, CISSS du Bas Laurent, Rimouski, Québec, Canada.
Michael Verret *CHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada. michael.verret.med@ssss.gouv.qc.ca.
Sarah O'ConnorCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Xavier SavardCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Xavier NeveuCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Camille MarcouxCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Olivier CosterousseCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Marc-Aurèle GagnonCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Huixin ZhangCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Laurence BeauléCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Frédérique Lamothe-BoucherCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.
Alexis F TurgeonCHU de Québec- Université Laval Research Centre, Population Health and Optimal Health Practices Research Unit (Trauma- Emergency- Critical Care Medicine), Québec city, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 148443
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceAlthough intraperitoneal local anesthetics are commonly used following intra-abdominal surgical procedures, the level of evidence supporting their use for postoperative pain management remains uncertain.

objectiveTo evaluate the effect of intraperitoneal local anesthetics on postoperative pain following intra-abdominal surgery. DATA SOURCES: Medline (PubMed), Embase (Embase.com), CENTRAL, Web of science and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from their inception to July 15th, 2022. TRIAL SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials comparing IPLA to placebo, usual care or other analgesic regimens among patients of any age undergoing any type of surgery. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Trial selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and the certainty of evidence were conducted in duplicate independently. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect models. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The co-primary outcomes were abdominal pain intensity at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative nausea and vomiting, opioid use, recovery of gastrointestinal transit, length of hospital stay, postoperative chronic pain, persistent postoperative opioid use, quality of recovery and adverse events.

resultsA total of 150 trials (n = 11,821 participants were included in our systematic review (97% of trials among adults). Intraperitoneal local anesthetics reduced postoperative pain intensity at 6 h (-0.86 point [95%CI -1.02 to -0.70]), 12 h (-0.74 point [95%CI -0.93 to -0.55]), 24 h (-0.65 point [95%CI -0.82 to -0.48]), and 48 h (-0.51 point [95%CI -0.70 to -0.31]), but not at 72 h (-0.38 point [95%CI -1.04 to 0.27]), with very low to low certainty of evidence. Modelled risk difference for achieving the clinically important effect and subgroup analyses among participants with moderate or high pain showed potential clinically significant effect from IPLA. Opioid use at 24 h (-10.4 mg of oral morphine equivalent [95% CI -13.1 to -7.6]), postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.79 [95% CI -0.71 to 0.88]), and time to gastrointestinal transit recovery (-3.80 h [95% CI -7.54 to -0.07]) were also reduced. We found no association for other outcomes. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Intraperitoneal local anesthetics may be associated with a small analgesic effect following intra-abdominal surgery. Considering the low to very low level of evidence supporting these findings, along with the limited data on adverse effects and long-term outcomes, their adoption as a standard of care intervention cannot be recommended at this stage. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018115062.

Indexed as

AbdomenAnesthetics, LocalPain ManagementPostoperative PainHumansInjections, IntraperitonealRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnesthetics, LocalIntraperitoneal anesthesiaLocal anestheticsMeta-analysisSurgerySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40348992
PMCPMC12065176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.