ReviewCureus2025
Comparing Ultrasound and Computed Tomography in Regional Anesthesia: Real-Time Precision or Radiologic Clarity?
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Musculoskeletal ultrasound-guided cellular therapy: Current applications and future directions in skeletal muscle regeneration.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review evaluates the comparative effectiveness of ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) in guiding regional anesthesia, with a focus on block accuracy, anesthetic spread, clinical efficacy, and procedural safety. A total of seven high-quality clinical studies were included, encompassing a range of nerve blocks such as celiac plexus, interscalene, intertransverse, and erector spinae plane blocks. Ultrasound guidance consistently demonstrated outcomes that were equivalent or superior to CT guidance in terms of anesthetic distribution, pain control, and patient satisfaction. In most cases, ultrasound enabled real-time visualization, minimized procedural complications, and eliminated radiation exposure while maintaining a high degree of accuracy, as validated by CT or MRI in select trials. CT retained value primarily as a secondary validation tool or in anatomically complex cases where ultrasound imaging is limited. The findings support the preferential use of ultrasound as the first-line imaging modality for regional anesthesia in a variety of clinical contexts. This review highlights the clinical and procedural advantages of ultrasound over CT and emphasizes the need for ongoing research to refine imaging-guided anesthetic techniques.
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.