MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205192264 · doi:10.1097/gox.0000000000004010

Evaluating the Efficacy of Two Regional Pain Management Modalities in Autologous Breast Reconstruction

2022· article· en· W4205192264 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast reconstructionModalitiesPain managementPain controlMammaplastyPostoperative painBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: At our institution, multimodal opiate-sparing pain management is the cornerstone of our enhanced recovery program for autologous breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes and pain control metrics following implementation of an enhanced recovery program with two different regional analgesia approaches. Methods: This retrospective cohort study identified 145 women who underwent autologous breast reconstruction from 2015 to 2017. Three groups were included: historical control patients (n = 46) and enhanced recovery patients that received multimodal pain management including a postoperative transversalis abdominis plane block with either a continuous local anesthetic catheter (n = 60) or a single-shot of liposomal bupivacaine (n = 39). The primary outcome was pain scores in the first three postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents and length of stay. Results: Postoperative pain scores were similar across all three groups until postoperative day 3. Length of stay was significantly shorter in both of the enhanced recovery cohorts (3.0 [3.0, 4.0]) compared with control patients (4.0 [4.0, 5.0], P < 0.001). Likewise, average total oral morphine equivalents consumption was significantly reduced in enhanced recovery patients (continuous catheter 215.9 (95% CI, 165.4–266.3); liposomal bupivacaine 211.0 (95% CI, 154.8–267.2); control 518.4 (95% CI 454.2–582.7), P < 0.001). Neither length of stay ( P = 0.953), nor oral morphine equivalents consumption ( P = 0.883) differed by type of regional analgesia. Conclusion: Compared with control patients, both approaches to regional transversalis abdominis plane block analgesia as part of an opiate-sparing enhanced recovery pain management strategy were successful, but neither superior to the other.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.272 · 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