Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41623444›Full record

ArticleJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2025

The efficacy of 0.25% bupivacaine infiltration in tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in singular stone of the pelvis: A randomized clinical trial.

Reza Kazemi, Hamidreza Moein Najafabadi, Mehrdad Norouzi, Amir Hossein Ghandehari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Reza KazemiDepartment of Urology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Hamidreza Moein NajafabadiDepartment of Urology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Mehrdad NorouziDepartment of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Amir Hossein GhandehariSchool of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Postoperative pain is a significant concern following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). While tubeless PCNL has reduced discomfort, effective and simple analgesic techniques are still needed. Materials and Methods: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted at two tertiary hospitals with 120 adult patients having solitary renal pelvic stones <3 cm. Patients were randomized into two groups: the intervention group received 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine infiltrated into the tract at surgery end, and the control group received no infiltration. Postoperative pain was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) at 6, 12, and 24 h. Both patients and outcome assessors were blinded. Data from 57 intervention and 56 control patients were analyzed. Results: Baseline demographic, anatomical, and perioperative characteristics were well-matched between the two groups (all Conclusion: Infiltration of the nephrostomy tract with 0.25% bupivacaine is a simple and effective method for significantly reducing postoperative pain at 6, 12, and 24 h after tubeless PCNL. This technique provides a sustained analgesic benefit and should be considered for routine implementation to enhance patient recovery.

Indexed as

Nephrolithiasispercutaneous nephrolithotomypostoperative pain

Identifiers

PMID41623444
PMCPMC12860464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.