ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Comparison of thoracic epidural anesthesia with an erector spinae plane infusion for post-esophagectomy analgesia: a pragmatic retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
Background: Effective pain management following esophagectomy facilitates recovery and may reduce the conversion from acute to chronic pain. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) has been the standard of care for pain management following esophagectomy; however, serious adverse effects and complications of TEA use have been reported. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block has been reported as an alternative analgesia technique, yet no studies have compared TEA with ESP. To address this knowledge gap, we performed a quasi-experimental design study of retrospective data from a 9-year period to compare TEA and ESP analgesia. Methods: With Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, medical records of patients undergoing an esophagectomy procedure [2016-2023] at a single institution (Rush University Medical Center) were studied. Clinical characteristics, co-morbidities, operative data, regional analgesia (ESP Results: Ninety-nine esophagectomies were identified and 79 included in the analysis. Seventy were performed using the Ivor-Lewis (2-hole) and 9 using the McKeown (3-hole) approach. Forty-four patients received TEA and 35 ESP analgesia. The ESP minus TEA difference in the AUC Conclusions: Our study demonstrated no significant differences in AUC
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.