Relative Perioperative Analgesic Efficacy of Superficial Versus Deep Approach of Serratus Anterior Plane Block for Anterior Chest Wall Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Both superficial and deep serratus anterior plane (SAP) blocks are effective for anterior chest wall surgeries, but there is little clarity on which is more effective. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the comparative efficacy of the 2 approaches for SAP block after anterior chest wall surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Registers of Controlled Trials for eligible RCTs from inception until August 2023. The primary outcome was opioid consumption during the first 24 hours of the postoperative period. The secondary outcomes included pain scores at various intervals, intraoperative opioid consumption, time to first analgesic request, block-related complications, opioid-related side effects, and patient satisfaction scores. Statistical analysis of the pooled data was performed using Review Manager Version 5.3. RESULTS: We identified 7 RCTs published between 2020 and 2022, enrolling 371 patients (186 in the superficial SAP block and 187 in the deep SAP block). Moderate certainty of evidence suggests that both the approaches (deep and superficial) of SAP block were comparable for 24-hour oral morphine equivalent consumption with a mean difference (MD) of 3.78 mg (95% CI: -1.70 to 9.29; P = 0.18; I2 = 87%). The results of other secondary outcomes were comparable, including resting pain scores with an MD of 0.08 (95% CI: -0.27 to 0.43; P = 0.67; I2 = 87%) for early pain and MD of 0.63 (95% CI: -1.28 to 0.01; P = 0.05; I2 = 95%) for late pain scores, time to first analgesic request with MD of -0.41 hour (95% CI: -1.40 to 0.59; P = 0.42; I2 = 90%), and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (odds ratio: 1.45 (95% CI: 0.72 to 2.90; P = 0.30; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: Current evidence does not support the preference for one approach of SAP block over the other for postoperative pain. Based on the available data, we recommend further future trials to determine any differences between these interventions.
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 | 0.012 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".