A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Intercostal Nerve Block After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The optimal method of pain control after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) remains controversial. We sought to determine whether intercostal nerve block with bupivicaine provided superior pain control, when compared with placebo, with a lower need for narcotics and improved health-related quality of life (HRQL) in the immediate postoperative period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-three patients were randomized to receive intercostal blockade with either 20 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine with epinephrine or 20 mL physiologic saline. All patients received intravenous narcotic patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) postoperatively. Data were collected on stone parameters, demographics, analgesic usage, length of stay, and HRQL as assessed by the Postoperative Recovery Scale. RESULTS: The mean age was 47.7±1.2 years; mean body mass index was 28.0±5.0 kg/m(2); mean stone diameter was 29.2±15.8 mm. Within the first 3 to 6 hours after surgery, there was a significant reduction in narcotic use for the group receiving intercostal nerve blockade with bupivacaine compared with placebo. At 3 hours, narcotic use was 2.4±3.1 mg vs 4.3±3.8 mg morphine equivalents (P=0.034), and within 6 hours of surgery, narcotic use was 5.9±6.1 mg vs 8.8±7.4 mg (P=0.096). Durable improvement in HRQL was also observed in patients receiving intercostal nerve blockade with bupivacaine compared with placebo (P=0.034). No complications were attributable to the intercostal nerve blocks in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Intercostal blockade with bupivacaine significantly improves both pain control and HRQL in the early postoperative period. The effectiveness of bupivacaine disappears within 6 hours of surgery, after which narcotic use becomes indistinguishable. Intercostal nerve blockade is an easy, safe, and inexpensive method that can be used to optimize pain control after PCNL.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".