ArticleJHLT open2026
Single-shot intrathecal morphine in bilateral lung transplantation: Early experience and feasibility.
Article in JHLT open, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bilateral lung transplantation via clamshell thoracotomy is associated with intense postoperative pain. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is the institutional standard at our center but carries haemodynamic, catheter-related, and anticoagulation constraints in the early post-transplant period. We describe a case series of 5 bilateral lung transplant recipients in whom single-shot intrathecal morphine (ITM) was used as the primary analgesic technique; the first reported experience of ITM in this setting. Across all cases, effective analgesia was achieved, no patient required TEA rescue, numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores did not exceed 2 up to 48 hours postoperatively, patient-reported satisfaction was good, and no adverse events attributable to ITM were observed. These findings contribute early safety and efficacy data for ITM in a setting where it has not previously been described.
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.