ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2025
Ultrasound-guided sacral multifidus plane block for perioperative analgesia: A comprehensive systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- The Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Block: A Narrative Review.Pain and therapy · 2026Review
- Erector spinae plane block versus caudal block in children: similar analgesia, different stories beneath the surface.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: The sacral multifidus plane block (SMPB) is an emerging regional anaesthesia technique targeting the dorsal rami of sacral spinal nerves, with potential applications in lower limb, pelvic, and perineal surgeries. Evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) has not been systematically synthesised. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, and the study was registered prospectively in PROSPERO. PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (January 2019-May 2025) for RCTs comparing SMPB with other regional techniques or no block. The primary outcome was time to rescue analgesia. Secondary outcomes included 24-h opioid consumption, postoperative pain scores, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Data were pooled using a random-effects model; trial sequential analysis (TSA) and GRADE assessment were performed. Results: Twelve RCTs (n = 768; 348 received SMPB) were included. SMPB significantly prolonged time to first rescue analgesia, reduced 24-h opioid consumption, and lowered pain scores at rest and movement during the first postoperative day, particularly during the intermediate (6-12 h) and late (24 h) postoperative periods. Patient satisfaction was generally higher with SMPB, correlating with improved analgesia and reduced opioid use. TSA confirmed the robustness of findings for time to rescue analgesia and opioid consumption, although the required sample size was not reached. No serious block-related complications were reported. Conclusions: SMPB appears to be a safe, effective regional anaesthesia technique, offering opioid-sparing benefits, prolonged analgesia, and high patient satisfaction. However, current evidence is limited by small sample sizes, methodological heterogeneity, and potential publication bias.
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.