ArticleRegional anesthesia and pain medicine2025
Pecto-intercostal fascial plane block with or without rectus sheath block in cardiac surgery: a prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study.
Article in Regional anesthesia and pain medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMedian sternotomy and chest tube sites drive pain following cardiac surgery. Prior research has demonstrated that pecto-intercostal fascial plane blocks (PIFBs) reduce median sternotomy pain after cardiac surgery. Prior studies examining the addition of a rectus sheath block (RSB) to localize the insertion site of subxiphoid chest tubes have had mixed results.
methodsIn this single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 62 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with median sternotomy and subxiphoid chest tubes were randomized to receive PIFB and RSB with local anesthetic versus PIFB with local anesthetic and RSB with saline placebo. The primary outcome was pain at rest and with deep breathing in the first 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included total opioid consumption at 24 and 48 hours, performance on incentive spirometry in the first 24 hours, time to extubation, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, and Quality of Recovery-15 score.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between groups for the primary outcome, with mean area under the curve (AUC) for pain at rest in the first 24 hours 93.37±41.38 (sample mean±sample SD) in the placebo group versus 86.11±42.78 in the bupivacaine group (p=0.51), and mean AUC for pain with deep breathing 135.55±43.74 in the placebo group versus 128.78±47.08 in the bupivacaine group (p=0.57). There were no differences in secondary outcomes between groups.
conclusionsAdding bilateral RSB to bilateral PIFB did not improve pain control or other outcomes for patients undergoing cardiac 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.