Trial reportDrug design, development and therapy2026
Liposomal Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia After Multilevel Posterior Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Prospective Three-Arm Randomized Study.
Trial report in Drug design, development and therapy, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study compared three standardized postoperative analgesic strategies for adults undergoing multilevel posterior lumbar fusion surgery: liposomal bupivacaine thoracolumbar interfascial plane block (LB-TLIP), ropivacaine TLIP block (Ropi-TLIP), and liposomal bupivacaine local infiltration analgesia (LB-LIA). Patients and Methods: This prospective, randomized, open-label, three-arm study enrolled 90 adults, with 30 patients in each group. The registry-listed primary outcome comprised serial resting and movement-evoked numerical rating scale (NRS) scores at 2, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 hours after discharge from the operating room. These profiles were analyzed longitudinally using repeated-measures fixed-effects models with participant-level cluster-robust standard errors. The 2-72-hour NRS area under the curve (AUC) was calculated as a non-registered exploratory derived summary; it was used for pilot-based sample-size planning but was not separately listed in the registry or documented in a dated statistical analysis plan. The trial was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2500097484) on February 19, 2025. Results: Movement-evoked NRS profiles showed significant group and group-by-time effects (P<0.001 and P=0.001, respectively). Resting NRS profiles showed a significant group effect (P=0.003) without a significant group-by-time interaction (P=0.133). The LB-LIA group generally had the lowest early pain scores. Exploratory movement-evoked AUC values were 220.0 ± 28.4, 244.6 ± 30.6, and 257.1 ± 34.4 NRS·h for LB-LIA, LB-TLIP, and Ropi-TLIP, respectively (adjusted overall P<0.001). Time to first ambulation favored LB-LIA, whereas rescue tramadol use, hospital stay, and recorded adverse events did not differ significantly. Conclusion: Serial NRS trajectories differed among groups, with generally lower early scores in the LB-LIA group. Exploratory AUC summaries were directionally consistent. These findings support lower early postoperative pain scores rather than broader clinical, mechanistic, opioid-sparing, or safety superiority. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2500097484; registered on February 19, 2025.
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.