Ultrasound guided transversus abdominis plane block in pediatric patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo assess safety and effectiveness of ultrasound-guided TAP block in children undergoing laparoscopic surgery for undescended testis.Subjects and methodsThis randomized controlled trial involved 108 children, 3–7 years old, randomly allocated into one of two equal groups; TAP Group and Control Group. All children received general anesthesia using propofol 1.5–2.5 mg/kg, atracurium 0.5 mg/kg and fentanyl 2 μg/kg. TAP Group received 0.5 ml/kg of ropivacaine 0.375% bilaterally under ultrasound guidance and control group received regular analgesics. Quality of analgesia was assessed using Children’s Hospital Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS) and Objective behavioral pain score (OPS). The primary outcome measures were hemodynamic parameters and degree of pain. Secondary outcome measures were intraoperative fentanyl requirement, postoperative rescue analgesia (time and dose), complications, hospital stay and degree of satisfaction of patients and their parents.ResultsTAP block group had significantly lower intraoperative fentanyl dose (p < 0.001), significantly longer time to first postoperative request of analgesic (p < 0.001), lower analgesic dose during the first postoperative 24 h (p < 0.001) and lower pain scores along the whole 24 postoperative hours. Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were within the clinically accepted range in the two groups. Parents’ satisfaction was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the TAP block group.ConclusionTAP block under ultrasound guidance was easy, safe, reliable and effective analgesic in children undergoing laparoscopic surgery for undescended testis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".