ArticleJournal of anesthesia2026
Comparison of paravertebral block techniques for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2026. 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
purposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic outcomes of ultrasound-guided single-shot, ultrasound-guided continuous, or surgeon-performed direct-vision single-shot approaches to paravertebral block (PVB).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of the adults who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung resection at a university hospital. They were categorized into those who underwent ultrasound-guided single-shot PVB (PVB-US), ultrasound-guided continuous PVB with catheter infusion (PVB-US-Cath), and surgeon-performed intraoperative single-shot PVB under thoracoscopic visualization (PVB-VATS). The primary outcome was the number of rescue analgesic administrations within 24 h of admission to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). The secondary outcomes were rescue analgesic use within 24-48 h and pain scores at PACU admission and on the mornings of postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 2.
resultsOf the 489 eligible patients, the data of 385 were included in the final analysis (PVB-US, n = 53; PVB-US-Cath, n = 249; PVB-VATS, n = 83). The median (IQR) numbers of rescue analgesic doses within 24 h for the PVB-US, PVB-US-Cath, and PVB-VATS groups were 1 (1-3), 2 (1-3), and 2 (0-3), respectively (p = 0.6880). Rescue analgesic use during 24-48 h and NRS pain scores at the PACU and on PODs 1 and 2 did not significantly differ between the groups.
conclusionThis study found no statistically significant differences in the postoperative analgesic outcomes of the ultrasound-guided single-shot, ultrasound-guided continuous, and surgeon-performed direct-vision single-shot PVB techniques for VATS. Given the predominantly mild and short-lived nature of pain after VATS, a technically simple single-shot strategy may offer an optimal balance between efficacy, feasibility, and procedural efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41491237What 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.