ArticleKorean journal of anesthesiology2025
Intertruncal versus classical approach to supraclavicular brachial plexus block on sensory-motor blockade for upper extremity surgery: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.
Article in Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lateral Decubitus Positioning Increases Pleura-Plexus Distance in Ultrasound-Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Targeting.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- [Peripheral regional anesthesia and analgesia: "the magnificent seven" for training].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs the characteristics of the intertruncal approach to the supraclavicular block (IA-SCB) are uncertain, we aimed to compare its effect on sensory-motor blockade with that of the classical approach (CA) within 30 min post-block.
methodsIn total, 122 patients undergoing elbow, forearm, wrist, or hand surgery were randomly assigned to receive CA-SCB or IA-SCB. Both groups received identical local anesthetic agents (1% lidocaine and 0.5% ropivacaine) in 25 ml total. The IA-SCB group received 15 ml between the middle and inferior trunks and 10 ml between the superior and middle trunks, while the CA-SCB group received 15 ml in the corner pocket and 10 ml in the center of the neural clusters. Sensory-motor blockade of all four terminal nerves was assessed every 5 min for 30 min. The non-inferiority threshold aimed to exclude the possibility that the IA-SCB was > 5% inferior to the CA-SCB in terms of the proportion of patients with complete sensory blockade at 20 min post-block.
resultsComplete sensory blockade at 20 min post-block was 79.3% and 72.7% with the CA-SCB and IA-SCB, respectively, exceeding the non-inferiority margin of -5% (-6.6%, 95% CI [-22.3% to 9.1%]; P value for non-inferiority = 0.206). Additionally, the IA-SCB showed an inferior musculocutaneous nerve blockade, longer performance time, and higher incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paresis.
conclusionsOur findings do not confirm the non-inferiority of the IA-SCB to the CA-SCB in achieving complete sensory blockade at 20 min post-block. Further research may be necessary to establish its efficacy in regional anesthesia.
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.