ArticleSaudi journal of anaesthesia
Regional anesthesia in breast surgery: An Italian expert consensus - Part 1: Methodology and Delphi strategy.
Article in Saudi journal of anaesthesia. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite being considered routine, breast surgery is associated with a high incidence of acute and chronic postoperative pain, which can significantly impact recovery and quality of life. Regional anesthesia techniques have become increasingly relevant within multimodal analgesic strategies, yet clinical practice remains heterogeneous and lacks clear guidance. To address this, we aimed to develop a multidisciplinary, evidence-based consensus on the role of regional anesthesia in breast surgery. Methods: An expert panel was appointed by the Italian Chapter of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia, including anesthesiologists and breast surgeons (in partnership with the Italian National Association of Breast Surgeons). A four-round Delphi method was applied to refine an initial set of 24 PICO-formulated questions. Each question was evaluated for relevance and clarity using a 9-point Likert scale (1 = not relevant/clear, 9 = extremely relevant/clear). Finalized questions underwent systematic review or network meta-analysis depending on data availability. Results: Eleven clinically relevant and clearly formulated PICO questions were identified after four Delphi rounds. These questions encompass acute and chronic pain control, block safety in anticoagulated patients, awake surgery, and the comparative efficacy of single-shot versus continuous blocks, among others. Each question will guide a systematic review and support the development of graded consensus statements. Conclusion: This consensus project establishes a transparent, multidisciplinary framework for guiding the use of regional anesthesia in breast surgery. The ultimate objective is to formulate a set of consensus statements, graded according to evidence strength, which will serve as a foundation for future guidelines and standardized clinical decision-making.
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.