Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41345825›Full record

ArticleJournal of Yeungnam medical science2025

Regional analgesia for postoperative pain control after thoracic surgery: a narrative review.

Sang-Jin Park, Eun Kyung Choi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Yeungnam medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sang-Jin ParkDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Eun Kyung ChoiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective management of post-thoracotomy pain is essential to prevent pulmonary complications and reduce the risk of developing chronic pain syndrome. Although systemic opioids remain a common option, their use is limited by significant adverse effects, making regional analgesia the cornerstone of postoperative pain management. Thoracic epidural analgesia, historically regarded as the gold standard, provides potent postoperative pain relief but carries risks of hypotension and, in rare cases, severe neurological events. Thoracic paravertebral block (PVB) has emerged as the primary alternative, offering comparable analgesic efficacy and an improved safety profile, particularly in maintaining hemodynamic stability. However, PVB is technically demanding and associated with a higher failure rate and localized procedural complications such as pneumothorax. Fascial plane blocks have recently been developed to prioritize safety. The erector spinae plane block is technically simpler, using the transverse process as a "bony backstop" to minimize the risk of pleural injury; however, its analgesic potency may be lower than that of PVB. The intertransverse process block seeks to combine the efficacy of PVB with enhanced safety; however, supporting evidence remains limited. Alternative regional techniques, such as serratus anterior plane block, intercostal nerve block, and continuous wound instillation, typically provide insufficient analgesia for the comprehensive pain associated with open thoracotomy. No regional analgesic technique has demonstrated universal superiority. The optimal approach should be individualized, balancing the distinct risk-benefit profile of each block with patient comorbidities, surgical factors, and institutional expertise.

Indexed as

AnalgesiaComplicationPostoperative painRegionalThoracotomy

Identifiers

PMID41345825
PMCPMC12800560

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.