Pub Date : 2023-04-27DOI: 10.1007/s44254-023-00007-5
Steve Coppens, Aisling Ni Eochagain, Danny Feike Hoogma, Geertrui Dewinter
The erector spinae plane block remains a divisive regional technique which has split the regional anesthesia community into believers and non-believers. Its main mechanism of action remains controversial and this has been pivotal in the controversy. We explore our current understanding of fascial plane blocks and erector spinae blocks as well as explore the gaps in knowledge. This opinion paper is meant to give a balanced view of the current state of this block in regard to guidelines, research and future. The viewpoint of the authors may not necessarily align with current ideas, however, hopefully will guide subsequent trials to more robust evidence.
{"title":"Stranger things: the erector spinae block, extra sensory perception, or paranormal block by proxy?","authors":"Steve Coppens, Aisling Ni Eochagain, Danny Feike Hoogma, Geertrui Dewinter","doi":"10.1007/s44254-023-00007-5","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44254-023-00007-5","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The erector spinae plane block remains a divisive regional technique which has split the regional anesthesia community into believers and non-believers. Its main mechanism of action remains controversial and this has been pivotal in the controversy. We explore our current understanding of fascial plane blocks and erector spinae blocks as well as explore the gaps in knowledge. This opinion paper is meant to give a balanced view of the current state of this block in regard to guidelines, research and future. The viewpoint of the authors may not necessarily align with current ideas, however, hopefully will guide subsequent trials to more robust evidence.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100082,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science","volume":"1 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44254-023-00007-5.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86310726","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-24DOI: 10.1007/s44254-023-00006-6
Quehua Luo, Yang Liu, Yi Zhu, Zhipeng Wang, Junyi Zheng, Weifeng Yao
To characterize the fragility index (FI) of statistically significant results reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (HDP) after brachial plexus blocks. A systematic review of RCTs retrieved from the PubMed-Medline, Embase, and Web of Science electronic databases was conducted. All alternative RCTs published between January 2012 and October 2022 were identified. Only RCTs with two parallel arms designs, and reporting HDP as the primary outcome, statistical significance, and superiority results were selected. The FI was calculated according to Fisher’s exact test using previously described methods. In addition, the risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials. The 23 RCTs that fulfilled the inclusion criteria had a median FI of 4 (interquartile range [IQR]2–8) and a median Fragility Quotient of 0.077 (IQR 0.038- 0.129). However, in 13 (56.5%) trials, the calculated FI value was ≤ 4. In 3/23 (13.0%) trials, the number of patients who dropped-out exceeded the FI value. Most trials (91.3%) had an overall low risk of bias. This systematic review revealed that the statistical results of RCTs investing HDP after brachial plexus blocks have tended to be fragile in the past decade. The FI should be an important aid in the interpretation of clinical results in combination with the P-value, particularly when statistically significant results are dependent on a small number of events. Future RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to obtain more robust results in this field.
{"title":"Statistical fragility of reporting hemidiaphragmatic paralysis after brachial plexus blocks in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review","authors":"Quehua Luo, Yang Liu, Yi Zhu, Zhipeng Wang, Junyi Zheng, Weifeng Yao","doi":"10.1007/s44254-023-00006-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44254-023-00006-6","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>To characterize the fragility index (FI) of statistically significant results reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (HDP) after brachial plexus blocks. A systematic review of RCTs retrieved from the PubMed-Medline, Embase, and Web of Science electronic databases was conducted. All alternative RCTs published between January 2012 and October 2022 were identified. Only RCTs with two parallel arms designs, and reporting HDP as the primary outcome, statistical significance, and superiority results were selected. The FI was calculated according to Fisher’s exact test using previously described methods. In addition, the risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized trials. The 23 RCTs that fulfilled the inclusion criteria had a median FI of 4 (interquartile range [IQR]2–8) and a median Fragility Quotient of 0.077 (IQR 0.038- 0.129). However, in 13 (56.5%) trials, the calculated FI value was ≤ 4. In 3/23 (13.0%) trials, the number of patients who dropped-out exceeded the FI value. Most trials (91.3%) had an overall low risk of bias. This systematic review revealed that the statistical results of RCTs investing HDP after brachial plexus blocks have tended to be fragile in the past decade. The FI should be an important aid in the interpretation of clinical results in combination with the P-value, particularly when statistically significant results are dependent on a small number of events. Future RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed to obtain more robust results in this field.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100082,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science","volume":"1 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44254-023-00006-6.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85661245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-23DOI: 10.1007/s44254-023-00013-7
Maria Mermiri, Georgios Mavrovounis, Eleni Laou, Nikolaos Papagiannakis, Ioannis Pantazopoulos, Athanasios Chalkias
Exogenous catecholamines may have pronounced side effects and affect physiological cascades. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of vasopressors on mortality of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted for relevant articles until December 2022. Eligibility criteria were randomized controlled and non-randomized trials. The primary outcome was in-hospital and 30-day mortality. The quality of studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool, while paired meta-analysis was used to estimate the pooled risk ratios (RR) along with their 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI). Analyses of 22 studies (n = 8034) revealed that vasopressor use is associated with mortality compared to no vasopressor therapy [RR (95%CI): 4.30 (3.21, 5.75); p < 0.001]. In-hospital and 30-day mortality are significantly higher in patients who receive vasopressors [RR (95%CI): 4.60 (2.47, 8.55); p < 0.001 and RR (95%CI): 2.97 (1.72, 5.14); p < 0.001, respectively]. Also, analyses of data from 10 studies (n = 3519) revealed that vasopressor use is associated with acute kidney injury [RR (95%CI): 3.17 (2.21, 4.54); p < 0.001]. In conclusion, current use of vasopressors in critically ill patients with COVID-19 may be associated with higher in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and incidence rate of acute kidney injury. Further research is required to estimate the correlation of specific vasopressor characteristics (type, timing, dose, combination) with adverse effects and mortality in this population.