ArticleLocal and regional anesthesia2025
The Analgesic Effects of a Saddle Block with Intrathecal Morphine for Penile-Inversion Vaginoplasty: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Local and regional anesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Regional Anesthesia for Penile Inversion Vaginoplasties.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite its association with severe postoperative pain, the use of regional anesthesia techniques for penile-inversion vaginoplasty surgery is understudied. This retrospective study aimed to assess the analgesic effects of a saddle block (ultra-low dose hyperbaric spinal anesthesia) with intrathecal (IT) morphine in transgender females undergoing penile inversion vaginoplasty. Methods: We performed a single-centre, retrospective chart review of 72 patients who underwent penile-inversion vaginoplasty with or without saddle block with IT morphine at our institution over a 26-months period. All patients received standard multimodal intravenous analgesia, and the surgeon administered both a pudendal nerve block and a spermatic cord block as part of routine care. Our primary outcome was cumulative opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalent) at 24h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain severity, duration of stay in the postoperative care unit and in-hospital, time to first opioid request and incidence of opioid- and block-related side effects. Results: 30 patients received a saddle block with IT morphine and 42 patients received standard analgesia. We found no statistical difference in cumulative opioid consumption at 24h postoperatively (control group: 17.7 mg [5.6, 30.8] vs intervention group 12.5 mg [7.5, 22.5] P: 0.249). The addition of a saddle block was associated with clinically and statistically significant improvements in short-term postoperative pain-related outcomes in the recovery room, including mean and maximum pain severity scores, time to first analgesic request, and duration of stay. While no difference in pain scores was detected at the 24-hour time point, mixed-effects modelling demonstrated lower pain trajectories over time among patients in the intervention group, suggesting a time-dependent benefit. However, the significant time-by-group interaction (p = 0.024) indicates that the difference in pain scores between groups decreased over time. We found no differences in the rates of nausea and vomiting between groups. No saddle block procedure-related complications were reported. Conclusion: This retrospective study suggests that despite no statistically significant difference in 24-hour opioid consumption, the addition of a saddle block with 100 mcg of IT morphine is associated with improved PACU pain scores, a longer time to first analgesic request, and a shorter PACU stay. These findings are hypothesis-generating and merit further investigation in a prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial.
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.