The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials Evaluating Regional Techniques for Postthoracotomy Analgesia
Abstract
In Brief BACKGROUND: Thoracotomy induces severe postoperative pain and impairment of pulmonary function, and therefore regional analgesia has been intensively studied in this procedure. Thoracic epidural analgesia is commonly considered the “gold standard” in this setting; however, evaluation of the evidence is needed to assess the comparative benefits of alternative techniques, guide clinical practice and identify areas requiring further research. METHODS: In this systematic review of randomized trials we evaluated thoracic epidural, paravertebral, intrathecal, intercostal, and interpleural analgesic techniques, compared to each other and to systemic opioid analgesia, in adult thoracotomy. Postoperative pain, analgesic use, and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: Continuous paravertebral block was as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia with local anesthetic (LA) but was associated with a reduced incidence of hypotension. Paravertebral block reduced the incidence of pulmonary complications compared with systemic analgesia, whereas thoracic epidural analgesia did not. Thoracic epidural analgesia was superior to intrathecal and intercostal techniques, although these were superior to systemic analgesia; interpleural analgesia was inadequate. CONCLUSIONS: Either thoracic epidural analgesia with LA plus opioid or continuous paravertebral block with LA can be recommended. Where these techniques are not possible, or are contraindicated, intrathecal opioid or intercostal nerve block are recommended despite insufficient duration of analgesia, which requires the use of supplementary systemic analgesia. Quantitative meta-analyses were limited by heterogeneity in study design, and subject numbers were small. Further well designed studies are required to investigate the optimum components of the epidural solution and to rigorously evaluate the risks/benefits of continuous infusion paravertebral and intercostal techniques compared with thoracic epidural analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: Evidence from a systematic review evaluating different regional analgesic techniques for management of post-thoracotomy pain shows that paravertebral block is as effective as thoracic epidural local anesthetic for analgesia, and is associated with fewer side effects, whereas other techniques provide inferior analgesia or require further study. Based on current evidence, thoracic epidural analgesia and paravertebral block are recommended as first choice treatments; intrathecal or intercostal analgesia are recommended if those techniques are not possible; interpleural analgesia is not recommended.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Schulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Moher, D., Pham, B., Jones, A., Cook, D. J., Jadad, A. R., Moher, M., Tugwell, P., & Klassen, T. P. (1998) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)01085-x · Cited by 3,560
Acute Pain after Thoracic Surgery Predicts Long-Term Post-Thoracotomy Pain
Katz, J., Jackson, M., Kavanagh, B. P., & Sandler, A. N. (1996) · The Clinical Journal of Pain · doi:10.1097/00002508-199603000-00009 · Cited by 915
Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials
Chalmers, T. C., Celano, P., Sacks, H. S., & Smith, H. (1983) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198312013092204 · Cited by 864
The Effects of Three Different Analgesia Techniques on Long-Term Postthoracotomy Pain
Şentürk, M., Özcan, P. E., Talu, G. K., Kiyan, E., Çamci, E., Özyalçin, S., Dilege, Ş., & Pembeci, K. (2002) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/00000539-200201000-00003 · Cited by 401
Cited by
Chou, R., Gordon, D. B., de Leon-Casasola, O. A., Rosenberg, J. M., Bickler, S., Brennan, T., Carter, T., Cassidy, C. L., Chittenden, E. H., Degenhardt, E., et al. (2016) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2015.12.008 · Cited by 3,171
Paravertebral block versus thoracic epidural for patients undergoing thoracotomy
Yeung, J. H., Gates, S., Naidu, B. V., Wilson, M. J., & Gao Smith, F. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd009121.pub2 · Cited by 573
Khalil, A. E., Abdallah, N. M., Bashandy, G. M., & Kaddah, T. A.-H. (2017) · Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2016.08.023 · Cited by 265
Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Postsurgical Pain: A Narrative Review
Steyaert, A., & Lavand’homme, P. (2018) · Drugs · doi:10.1007/s40265-018-0866-x · Cited by 97
Kampe, S., Wendland, M., Welter, S., Aigner, C., Hachenberg, T., Ebmeyer, U., & Weinreich, G. (2018) · Pain Medicine · doi:10.1093/pm/pnx238 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Joshi, G. P., Bonnet, F., Shah, R., Wilkinson, R. C., Camu, F., Fischer, B., Neugebauer, E. A. M., Rawal, N., Schug, S. A., Simanski, C., & Kehlet, H.
- Venue
- Anesthesia & Analgesia
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1026-1040
- ISSN
- 0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2002193364
- Cited by
- 664
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 5.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials Evaluating Regional Techniques for Postthoracotomy Analgesia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1213/01.ane.0000333274.63501.ff
- The paper
- Joshi, G. P., Bonnet, F., Shah, R., Wilkinson, R. C., Camu, F., Fischer, B., Neugebauer, E. A. M., Rawal, N., Schug, S. A., Simanski, C., & Kehlet, H. (2008). A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials Evaluating Regional Techniques for Postthoracotomy Analgesia. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ane.0000333274.63501.ff
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.