ArticleBMJ open2025
Efficacy and safety of paravertebral blockade in paediatric cardiothoracic surgery: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionParavertebral blockade (PVB) is a regional anaesthesia technique increasingly used in paediatric cardiothoracic surgery for postoperative pain management. However, its comparative efficacy and safety relative to other analgesic strategies remain inadequately synthesised. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness, safety and complications of PVB in paediatric patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov and other relevant sources from inception to February 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PVB with systemic opioids, epidural analgesia or placebo in patients aged <18 years will be included. Exclusion criteria include non-RCTs, adult populations and non-cardiothoracic surgeries. Primary outcomes include postoperative pain intensity measured using validated scales such as Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability Scale or Numeric Rating Scale within 24-48 hours. Secondary outcomes include opioid consumption within 24-48 hours, length of hospital stay, haemodynamic stability and complications (eg, pneumothorax, local anaesthetic toxicity). Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data and assess the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model or a narrative synthesis will be conducted based on heterogeneity ( ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this study involves secondary analysis of existing data, ethical approval is not required. The completed review will be submitted for open-access publication in a peer-reviewed journal to ensure accessibility for clinicians, researchers and policymakers. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42025644837.
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.