ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2025
Efficacy and safety of the pudendal nerve block as a component of multimodal analgesia for cervical brachytherapy.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 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.
- Pain management and analgesic strategies in patients with carcinoma uterine cervix undergoing intracavitary or interstitial brachytherapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Whilst an essential component of curative management, cervical brachytherapy is associated with considerable pain and discomfort, with analgesic protocols varying between institutions. We present the first series on adjunctive pudendal nerve block (PNB) in addition to routine anaesthesia. Methods: Retrospective review of patients receiving brachytherapy for cervical malignancies across two time periods, correlating to the institutional introduction of PNB. Technically, bilateral PNB was performed using 1 % ropivacaine under general anaesthesia and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) was used post-operatively. Median pain scores (11-point numeric rating scale), acceptability of pain (<20 % of recorded scores ≥ 4), opioid requirement and adverse events are reported. Intracavitary with or without interstitial brachytherapy was performed as per EMBRACE-2 protocol. Results: 78 patients receiving 149 brachytherapy episodes were included, of which 95 episodes (64%) utilised PNB. 48% of cases required interstitial needles in both cohorts, with no significant differences in demographics.Median pain scores were lower in the PNB cohort (1 vs. 2.5; p = 0.003). PNB was associated with less episodes of unacceptable pain, as defined above (33 % vs. 63 %; p < 0.001). This benefit was sustained on binomial logistic regression, including such factors as number of interstitial needles, baseline opioid use and applicator model choice.PNB use was also associated with reduced opioid requirement via PCA (p < 0.001) and there were no differences in the incidence of hypotension, respiratory depression or nausea between cohorts. Conclusions: PNB is an effective and safe adjunct to general anaesthesia and intravenous PCA for cervical brachytherapy, with improved pain and reduced opioid requirements. We advocate for routine use of PNB in addition to multimodal analgesic regimens.
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.