ArticleThe Korean journal of pain2025
Efficacy of intravenous acetaminophen as adjunct analgesia in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in The Korean journal of pain, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although intravenous (IV) acetaminophen (AAP) may help reduce severe postoperative pain and opioid use after cardiovascular surgery, its effectiveness must be further validated. Therefore, the authors aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of perioperative IV AAP in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery by conducting this meta-analysis. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for studies published up to March 21, 2024. Six randomized controlled trials comparing IV AAP with a placebo in cardiovascular surgery were included. The mean difference (MD) was calculated to estimate pooled effect sizes. The primary outcome was opioid consumption, measured in morphine equivalent dose, and the secondary outcome was postoperative pain score. Results: Postoperative opioid consumption was significantly reduced with IV AAP than it was with a placebo (MD: -21.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -38.41 to -4.95, Conclusions: IV AAP was more effective than a placebo for postoperative adjunct analgesia in patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery.
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.