MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288058669 · doi:10.1097/eja.0000000000001552

Transversus abdominis plane block versus local anaesthetic wound infiltration for analgesia after caesarean section

2021· review· en· W4288058669 on OpenAlexaff
Sina Grape, Kyle R. Kirkham, Éric Albrecht

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCaesarean sectionAnesthesiaFentanylAnalgesicMorphineLocal anestheticRandomized controlled trialSurgeryBupivacainePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and local anaesthetic wound infiltration are used to relieve pain after caesarean section. OBJECTIVES To determine whether TAP block or local anaesthetic wound infiltration is the better analgesic option after caesarean section. DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science up to June 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We retrieved randomised controlled trials comparing TAP block with wound infiltration after caesarean section. Primary outcome was pain score during rest (analogue scale, 0 to 10) at 2 h postoperatively, analysed according to the TAP block technique (ultrasound-guided/landmark-guided), anaesthetic strategy (spinal/general), intrathecal fentanyl (yes/no) and multimodal analgesia (yes/no). Secondary pain-related outcomes included pain scores during rest at 12 and 24 h, and total intravenous morphine consumption at 2, 12 and 24 h. We sought rates of block complications, including postoperative infection, haematoma, visceral injury and local anaesthetic systemic toxicity. RESULTS Seven trials, totalling 475 patients, were identified. There was no difference in pain score during rest at 2 h between groups. Subgroup analyses revealed no differences related to TAP block technique (P = 0.64), anaesthetic strategy (P = 0.53), administration of intrathecal fentanyl (P = 0.59) or presence of multimodal analgesia (P = 0.57). Pain score during rest at 12 h and intravenous morphine consumption at 2 and 12 h were identical in both groups. Data were insufficient to compare block complications. Overall quality of evidence was moderate. CONCLUSION There is moderate level evidence that TAP block and wound infiltration provide similar postoperative analgesia after caesarean section. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER PROSPERO CRD42020208046.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.011
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207