ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Nerve block or wound infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine for postoperative pain management in open orthopedic surgery: a meta-analysis of 38 randomized controlled trials involving 3,389 patients.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients undergoing open orthopedic surgeries often report substantial postoperative pain. The present work aimed to provide effective evidence for perioperative pain management in open orthopedic surgeries through comprehensive electronic database searches and the inclusion of more high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that report on the safety and effectiveness of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) in these surgeries. Methods: We performed the present work strictly under the guidelines of the Cochrane handbook and PRISMA recommendations. Under the guidance of the established retrieval strategy, two researchers independently performed the literature retrieval. Each included study was assessed in according with Cochrane risk of bias tool. We utilized STATA software to perform all meta-analyses in the current study. Results: 38 RCTs encompassing 3,389 patients were included in this study. The results demonstrated that there was statistical significance in pain intensity scores on POD2 [SMD = -0.25, 95% CI (-0.49 to -0.02)] and a trend toward statistical significance on postoperative day 1 (POD1) [SMD = -0.17, 95% CI (-0.35 to 0.00)] between the two groups. However, no statistical differences in pain scores on POD0, POD3, opioid consumption (total, POD1, POD2, POD3), adverse events, patient satisfaction, and the length of hospital stay. Conclusion: Compared to conventional medications, LB does not demonstrate a significant advantage in perioperative pain management, nor does it significantly reduce opioid consumption. Further high-quality RCTs are required to confirm these findings and greater attention should be given to the long-term safety of LB to ensure its reliability for practical use.
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.