Effect of transversus abdominis plane block on postoperative outcomes in gynecologic oncology patients managed on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To characterize the effect of transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks on post-operative outcomes in patients undergoing laparotomy for gynecologic malignancy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study assessed patients undergoing laparotomy in 2016-2017 and 2020 in Alberta, Canada. The primary outcome was opioid consumption in oral morphine milligram equivalent (MME). Secondary outcomes included maximum pain scores, length of stay, and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) use. Outcomes were compared using t-test with subgroup analysis by NSAID use. Multivariate regression modelling was performed for potential confounders. RESULTS: Data was collected on 956 patients; 828 received a TAP block, 128 did not. Opioid use in the first 24 h was lower in the TAP block group (35.9 mg MME vs 44.5 mg MME, p = 0.0294), without any increase in pain scores, this did not remain significant after regression analysis. Patients with TAP blocks had significant reduced mean length of stay (3.2 days vs. 5.0 days, p < 0.0001), and PCA use (19.9% vs. 56.25%, p < 0.0001). On subgroup analysis of patients that did not receive NSAIDs (n = 160), mean opioid use was decreased in those patients with TAP blocks compared to those without TAP blocks in the first 24 h (36.1 mg vs. 61.2 mg, p = 0.0017), and at 24 to 48 h (16.3 mg vs. 51.0 mg, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon-administered TAP blocks were associated with decreased length of stay and post-operative opioid use in patients not receiving scheduled NSAIDs. This decrease in opioid use was not associated with any increase in average or maximum pain scores.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".