Observational studyBMC anesthesiology2026
Continuous serratus-intercostal plane block versus intercostal cryoanalgesia for postoperative pain after minimally invasive cardiac surgery: a prospective comparative observational study.
Observational study in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06086535 (Intercostal Nerve Cryoanalgesia vs BRILMA Block for Minithoracotomy on Cardiac Surgery), which is not on this 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.
Intercostal Nerve Cryoanalgesia vs BRILMA Block for Minithoracotomy on Cardiac Surgery
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive cardiac surgery via minithoracotomy is associated with postoperative pain. Continuous BRILMA (block of the lateral branches of the intercostal nerves in the mid-axillary line) and intercostal cryoanalgesia are opioid-sparing techniques, but comparative evidence in this setting is limited.
methodsIn this prospective comparative observational study, consecutive adults undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery received either continuous BRILMA or intercostal cryoanalgesia according to routine institutional practice. Treatment allocation was not determined by the study protocol and no randomization was performed. Pain at rest and during deep inspiration was assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) after extubation and at 24, 48, and 72 h, discharge, and 30 days. The primary endpoint was pain at rest over the first 72 h. Secondary outcomes included inspiratory pain, opioid consumption during the first 72 postoperative hours, neuropathic pain, pulmonary complications, and hospital stay. Longitudinal analyses were performed using linear mixed models adjusted for age, sex, and surgical time.
resultsSixty-three patients were analyzed (BRILMA n = 33; cryoanalgesia n = 30). Pain decreased significantly over time in both groups (p < 0.001), with significant group-by-time interactions at rest (p = 0.002) and during deep inspiration (p < 0.001). BRILMA was associated with lower early pain scores, particularly at 72 h, whereas cryoanalgesia showed comparable or lower pain levels at 30 days. Although a greater proportion of patients in the cryoanalgesia group required rescue opioids, cumulative opioid exposure in the first 72 h was low in both groups. Neuropathic pain incidence was low and similar between techniques.
conclusionBRILMA was associated with lower early postoperative pain scores, while cryoanalgesia showed a trend toward lower pain levels at 30 days. Overall opioid requirements and neuropathic pain rates were low, suggesting that both regional techniques may represent suitable regional analgesic strategies in this setting.
trial registrationThe study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06086535; October 17, 2023). Ethical approval was obtained from the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (Barcelona, Spain) (protocol number: PR(AG)324/2022; approved on November 25, 2022).
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.