ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2026
Gabapentinoids for Upper Airway Surgery Pain Management: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Assess the analgesic and potential adverse effects of gabapentinoids in patients undergoing upper airway surgery (UAS). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Data sources included Ovid Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane. All RCTs and cohort studies from June 2002 to August 2024 regarding treatment outcomes of gabapentinoids for UAS were extracted. Studies were subjected to a two-reviewer blinded screening, extraction, and appraisal process. Assessment of study quality was implemented via the NIH quality assessment tool for RCTs. Primary outcome was decreased postoperative pain. Secondary outcomes included adverse drug events and opiate needs postoperatively. Results: Out of 397 studies screened, 21 met inclusion criteria. There were 828 gabapentinoid patients and 684 controls. Twelve studies were adenotonsillectomies and tonsillectomies, six were septoplasties, one was septoplasty with and without turbinoplasty, one lateral pharyngoplasty and tonsillectomy, and one maxillomandibular advancement. Appraisal revealed studies were of low (18) and moderate (3) risk of bias. Meta-analyses with subgroupings as appropriate were performed for these categories: pain score at 0-2 and 16-24 h; opioid consumption post-surgery; minutes to first analgesia; postoperative dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. Gabapentinoids significantly lowered pain levels 0-2 and 16-24 h postoperatively, decreased opioid consumption, and increased time to first analgesia. Conclusion: This review of current scientific literature supports perioperative use of gabapentinoids for UAS to reduce postoperative pain and lower analgesic requirement. Future studies should include larger cohorts with standardized protocols regarding timing, dosing of medication, objective measurements, proper blinding procedures for study personnel, and robust statistical analysis.
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.