Dexamethasone as a ropivacaine adjuvant to pre‐emptive incision‐site infiltration analgesia in pediatric craniotomy patients: A prospective, multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone added to incision-site infiltration has been routinely used to reduce pain after tonsillectomy in children. However, this has not been studied in pediatric craniotomy patients yet. We hypothesized that incision-site infiltration with a combination of ropivacaine and dexamethasone might provide superior analgesia to ropivacaine alone in pediatric craniotomy patients. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, children aged 2-12 years, scheduled for craniotomy, were prospectively enrolled at two study centers, from September 2, 2019, to July 5, 2020. Eighty children were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ropivacaine plus dexamethasone group who received pre-emptive incision-site infiltration with 0.2% ropivacaine plus 0.025% dexamethasone, or ropivacaine group who received 0.2% ropivacaine alone. Primary outcome was the modified Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (mCHEOPS) at 24 h postoperatively. Primary analysis was performed using the modified intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Pre-emptive incision-site infiltration with ropivacaine plus dexamethasone had a reduced pain score of 2.0, compared with the pain score of 2.9 in the ropivacaine group, at 24 h postoperatively (mean difference -0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.7 to -0.2; p = .019). Estimated median of the time of first rescue analgesic demand was 24 h in the ropivacaine plus dexamethasone group and 8.5 h in the ropivacaine group [hazard ratio 0.43, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.08; Log-rank p = .0025]. No adverse events related to incision-site infiltration with dexamethasone were observed in this study. DISCUSSION: Dexamethsone reduces the local production of pro-inflammatory factors after tissue damage and as a ropivacaine adjuvant for incision-site infiltration reduced the pain scores by 31% at 24 h postoperatively. The results were similar to several prior studies on to tonsillectomy patients. However, this changes on pain scores might has limited clinical significance. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dexamethasone to ropivacaine for preoperative incision-site infiltration has better postoperative analgesic effect than ropivacaine alone in pediatric craniotomy patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".