Ultrasound guided quadratus lumborum block versus interlaminar epidural block for analgesia in pediatric abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the efficacy and safety of epidural block (EB) are fairly high, complications such as inadvertent dural puncture may limit its use. Ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block (QLB) is a relatively new regional technique that provides perioperative somatic and visceral analgesia for pediatric patients. This trial compared the quality of pain relief in pediatric patients undergoing abdominal surgery who received either QLB or EB. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups: Group E(n = 29): received EB; Group QL(n = 29): received QLB. Both groups were injected with 0.25% bupivacaine (0.5 ml/kg). Assessment of total analgesia consumption was the primary outcome measure, whereas the secondary outcome measures were assessment of postoperative analgesic effect by Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS) and time of first analgesic request. RESULTS: Our study showed that the mean total fentanyl consumption was comparable between both groups(38.67 ± 5.02 and 36.47 ± 5.13 µg in the E and QL groups, respectively, P = 0.246). Only five patients did not require rescue analgesia (3 in the E group,2 in the QL group, P = 0.378). The mean duration of analgesia showed no significant difference between the two groups (9.9 ± 1.58 and 11.02 ± 1.74 h in the E and QL groups, respectively, P = 0.212). Evaluation of CHEOPS score values immediately in PACU and for the initial 24 h following operation showed no significant difference between the two study groups(P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: QLB can achieve analgesic effects comparable to those of EB as a crucial part of multimodal analgesia in children undergoing abdominal surgeries. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PACTR202203906027106.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".