ArticleUpdates in surgery2026
Comparison between cryoanalgesia, epidural anaesthesia and erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia after minimally-invasive anatomic lung resection: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Updates in surgery, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regional anaesthesia technique play a fundamental role in pain control after minimally invasive anatomic lung resection. In this setting, cryoanalgesia has been scarsely investigated. The aim of this study is to compare cryoanalgesia with two among the most effective regional anaesthesia techniques: erector spinae plane block (ESPB), and epidural analgesia (EA). Patients scheduled for minimally invasive anatomic lung resection were randomized to receive either cryoanalgesia, ESPB or EA (25 patients per group). Static and dynamic pain scores were evaluated at multiple time points up to 2 months postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was the static pain score, assessed with the numeric rating scale (NRS) at 24 h from surgery. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, patient satisfaction, and use of painkillers at two months. Static NRS pain scores at 24 h showed no significant difference between groups (1.92 (± 2.12), 2.63 (± 2.14), and 2.45 (± 1.95) for cryoanalgesia, ESPB, and EA, respectively, p= 0.494). Among secondary outcomes, EA was associated with lower intraoperative remifentanil doses and a trend towards better patient satisfaction at 2 months than the two other techniques; while pain scores at other time points and postoperative opioid consumption were comparable. No significant differences in postoperative pain control were observed among patients receiving cryoanalgesia, EA, or ESPB during the first 48 postoperative hours or at 2 months after surgery. Further studies are needed in order to understand how to improve the efficacy of cryoanalgesia for minimally-invasive lung resections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42709387What 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.