IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0237363.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficacy and safety of paravertebral block versus intercostal nerve block in thoracic surgery and breast surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sheng Huan
  • Youming Deng
  • Jia Wang
  • Yihao Ji
  • Guoping Yin

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of paravertebral block (PVB) versus intercostal nerve block (INB) in thoracic surgery and breast surgery. Methods: The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to February 2020 for all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the analgesic efficacy and safety of PVB compared with INB after thoracic surgery and breast surgery. For binary variables, odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was used. For continuous variables, weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used. RevMan5. 3 and Stata/MP 14.0 were used for performing the meta-analysis. Results: A total of 9 trials including 440 patients (PVB block:222 patients; INB: 218 patients) met the inclusion criteria. In the primary outcome, there was no significant differences between the two groups with respect to postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) at 1h (Std. MD = -0. 20; 95% CI = -1. 11to 0. 71; P = 0. 66), 2h (Std. MD = -0. 71; 95% CI = -2. 32to 0. 91; P = 0. 39), 24h (Std. MD = -0. 36; 95% CI = -0. 73 to -0. 00; P = 0. 05) and 48h (Std. MD = -0. 04; 95% CI = -0. 20 to 0. 11; P = 0. 57). However, there was significant difference in VAS of non Chinese subgroup at 1h (Std. MD = 0. 33; 95% CI = 0. 25to 0. 41; P

Suggested Citation

  • Sheng Huan & Youming Deng & Jia Wang & Yihao Ji & Guoping Yin, 2020. "Efficacy and safety of paravertebral block versus intercostal nerve block in thoracic surgery and breast surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-21, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237363
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237363
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237363
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237363&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0237363?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237363. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.