Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Caudal Block in Inguinal Hernia Repair Surgery in Pediatrics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: caudal epidural block (CEB) is the most preferred modality for pediatric regional analgesia because of its effective somatic and visceral pain control, though transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is an evolving regional anesthetic technique for abdominal wall. Our study aims to compare the analgesic effect of (CEB) versus (TAP) block in pediatrics undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgeries.Patient and Methods: The study enrolled 44 children, aged 3 to 7 years, scheduled for unilateral inguinal hernia repair surgery. Children were divided into 2 equal groups. Group A received ultrasound guided (CEB), while group B received ultrasound guided (TAP) block. We used a multimodal approach of pain control including regional block, intraoperative fentanyl when needed, standard postoperative paracetamol, and rescue ibuprofen when needed. Hemodynamic stability, fentanyl needs, time for first analgesic request, pain scores by Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Score (CHEOPS), and ibuprofen requirements were recorded. Results: Both (CEB) and (TAP) groups showed hemodynamic stability, meanwhile there was no need for fentanyl among all patients in both groups, and the time for first analgesia in CEB and TAP groups, was (4.59±0.59) and (7.48±1.35) hours respectively. Furthermore, the ibuprofen requirements and pain scores were statistically significantly higher in (CEB) group than (TAP) group (P-value < 0.05). Conclusion: Both TAP block and CEB provide effective analgesia in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair surgery with TAP block superiority over CEB as evidenced by longer time for first analgesic request, decreased analgesics needs, and lower pain scores.Keywords: caudal, TAP, ultrasound, pediatric, surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".