ArticleScientific reports2025
Preclinical safety and feasibility of a bupivacaine-loaded hydrogel for pain relief after spinal surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Hydrogels and Organogels for Local Anesthetic Delivery: Advances, Challenges, and Translational Perspectives.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pain and side effects of analgesics hinder postoperative recovery after instrumented spine surgery. Current locoregional blocks and sustained-release formulations are limited by rapid systemic absorption. We evaluated the local and systemic safety of a bupivacaine-loaded hydrogel, co-implanted with pedicle screws, in a sheep spine surgery model. Gelatin-based ring-shaped hydrogels containing bupivacaine crystals (305 mg total) were implanted with screws in eight sheep (Group C). Control groups included screws only (Group A), screws with unloaded hydrogels (Group B), and subcutaneous (SC) bupivacaine infiltration (150 mg, Group D). Plasma drug levels, systemic safety parameters, and histological host reaction at 6 and 56 days were assessed. All animals recovered without complications. Group D showed a Cmax of 138.3 ± 68.5 ng/mL at 1 h, while Group C had a lower Cmax of 50.4 ± 24.5 ng/mL at 28 h. The elimination half-life (T1/2) in Group C was 6.5 times longer than in Group D (67.6 ± 15.6 vs. 10.7 ± 5.5 h). Histology showed no differences in host reaction between groups. In conclusion, bupivacaine-loaded hydrogel was well-tolerated locally and systemically, with prolonged drug release and lower systemic exposure than SC infiltration. This approach shows promise for sustained postoperative analgesia in spine 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.