Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40588600›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2025

Laparoscopic-guided transversus abdominis plane block combined with port-site infiltration for postoperative analgesia after gastric bypass: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

Rita Cataldo, Vincenzo Bruni, Sabrina Migliorelli, Ida Francesca Gallo, Giuseppe Spagnolo, Giulia Gibin, Miriam Borgetti, Alessandro Strumia, Alessandro Ruggiero, Giuseppe Pascarella

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Rita CataldoUnit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo BruniUnit of Bariatric Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Sabrina MigliorelliUnit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Rome, Italy. sabrina.migliorelli@policlinicocampus.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-9694-9487
Ida Francesca GalloUnit of Bariatric Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe SpagnoloUnit of Bariatric Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Giulia GibinUnit of Bariatric Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.
Miriam BorgettiUnit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro StrumiaUnit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro RuggieroUnit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe PascarellaUnit of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Via Alvaro del Portillo 200, 00128, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients undergoing laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP) commonly experience moderate to severe postoperative pain. We conducted a randomized, prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study to evaluate the analgesic effect of laparoscopic-guided TAP (LG-TAP) block after LGBP in a high-volume bariatric center, applying an enhanced recovery after metabolic and bariatric surgery protocol. MATERIALS AND

methods84 patients were randomly allocated to receive LG-TAP block with local anesthetic (LA) or saline solution (placebo), both combined with port-site infiltration with LA (LA-PSI). Primary outcome was pain score measured in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and at 6, 12, and 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative nausea and/or vomiting, analgesic requirement, time to walking, time to flatus, length of hospital stay, and surgical complications.

resultsDifferences were observed in intra-group comparisons (LG-TAP vs. placebo) for the primary outcome-NRS in postoperative analgesia-with a median (IQR) NRS of 4 (2-5) vs. 2 (2-5) in PACU, 4.5 (2-6) vs. 2.5 (1-6) at 6 h and 3 (0-5) vs. 2 (0-4) at 12 h, although no statistically differences were demonstrated (PACU: p-value = 0.26; 6 h: p-value = 0.3; 12 h: p-value = 0.24). No statistically and clinically differences were observed for NRS at 24 h postoperatively with a median (IQR) of 1 (0-3) vs. 1 (0-4) at 24 h; p = 0.89. No differences were observed as regards secondary outcomes.

conclusionWhile a potential analgesic effect of saline solution through fascial hydrodissection cannot be excluded, our results more convincingly support that LG-TAP block provides no significant analgesic effect when LA-PSI is adequately implemented.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, LocalGastric BypassLaparoscopyNerve BlockPostoperative PainAbdominal MusclesAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnesthetics, LocalERABSLaparoscopic gastric bypassMetabolic and bariatric surgeryMultimodal analgesiaRegional anesthesiaTAP block

Identifiers

PMID40588600

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.