MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125483115 · doi:10.1186/s40814-021-00801-7

Continuous erector spinae plane block versus intercostal nerve block in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a pilot randomized controlled trial

2021· article· en· W3125483115 on OpenAlex
Dillon Horth, William Sanh, Peter Moisiuk, Turlough O’Hare, Yaron Shargall, Christian Finley, Waël C. Hanna, John Agzarian, Mauricio Forero, Kim Davis, Thuva Vanniyasingam, Lehana Thabane, Harsha Shanthanna

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePilot and Feasibility Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsImpactSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonSt Joseph's Health CareMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Anesthesia Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaVideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgerySurgeryIntercostal nervesLidocaineNerve blockVisual analogue scaleAdverse effectPatient satisfaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The optimal analgesia method in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) remains controversial. Intercostal nerve blockade (ICNB) is limited by its duration of action. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block has the potential to provide satisfactory analgesia for VATS; however, the effectiveness of continuous ESP versus surgeon-performed ICNB has not been investigated. The objectives of this study were to establish feasibility of patient recruitment and follow-up before undertaking a fully powered randomized controlled trial (RCT); and, secondarily, to compare opioid usage, pain control, and sensory blockade. METHODS: , contraindications to neuraxial analgesia techniques as per the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain guidelines, known allergy to local anesthetics, language or comprehension barriers, procedures with a higher chance of open surgery, and regular opioid use for ≥3 months preoperatively. Patients underwent either continuous ESP (n=12) or surgeon-performed ICNB (n=12). All patients received routine intraoperative anesthesia care and multimodal analgesia. Feasibility criteria were recruitment rate of two patients/week and full follow-up in all patients in-hospital. We compared opioid consumption, postoperative pain scores (0-10 numerical rating scale), adverse events, patient satisfaction, and distribution of sensory blockade as clinical outcomes (secondary). RESULTS: Feasibility of primary outcomes was successfully demonstrated. Five patients had an epidural in anticipation of open surgery. Mean opioid consumption as equivalent morphine units was less in the ESP group over the first 24 h (mean difference, 1.63 [95% CI -1.20 to 4.45]) and 48 h (mean difference, 2.34 [95% CI -1.93 to 6.61]). There were no differences in adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: A fully powered RCT is feasible with modifications. Our results also suggest that continuous ESP is safe and can decrease opioid needs. However, it is important to consider procedures to improve compliance to protocol and adherence to assigned interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03176667 . Registered June 5, 2017.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it