ReviewCureus2025
Comparing Pudendal Nerve Blocks and Caudal Blocks for Pediatric Urological Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pudendal nerve blocks (PNBs) and caudal blocks (CBs) are commonly used regional anesthesia techniques in pediatric urological surgeries. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of PNBs versus CBs in this patient population. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL to identify studies comparing PNBs and PBs in pediatric urological surgeries. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and observational studies assessing postoperative pain scores, duration of analgesia, and complication rates. Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessments were performed independently by two reviewers. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager version 5.4 (RevMan; Computer program. Version 5.4. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020). Seven studies, comprising 644 pediatric patients, were included. PNBs significantly reduced postoperative pain scores at 6, 12, and 24 hours compared to CBs, with mean differences of -1.83, -2.10, and -2.94, respectively. PNBs also prolonged analgesia duration and reduced opioid consumption. The incidence of urinary retention and the need for rescue analgesia were lower in the PNB group. No significant differences were observed in motor block or systemic side effects. PNBs offer superior pain relief and reduce opioid consumption and complications compared to CBs in pediatric urological surgeries. These findings support the integration of PNBs into clinical practice as an effective regional anesthesia technique. Further research is needed to confirm these results and optimize pain management strategies in pediatric patients.
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.