ArticleJournal of pain research2026
Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Liposomal Bupivacaine, Ropivacaine, and Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia for Adult Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Retraospective Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of three analgesic regimens-PCIA (patient-controlled intravenous analgesia), R (ropivacaine), and LB (liposomal bupivacaine) local infiltration-in adult patients undergoing VATS (video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery). Methods: Adults undergoing unilateral VATS in 2024 were retrospectively assigned to PCIA, R, and LB groups. IPTW (inverse probability of treatment weighting) balanced baseline confounders. The primary effectiveness outcome was the 72-h cumulative pain burden (area under the curve, AUC). Secondary outcomes included NRS (numerical rating scale) scores and early recovery indicators; independent factors for postoperative pain were also analyzed. Safety was assessed by adverse event incidences. CEA (cost-effectiveness analysis) was conducted from the Chinese healthcare perspective, with robustness validated by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (OWSA, PSA). Results: 829 patients (PCIA: 274; R: 258; LB: 297) were included. After IPTW, baseline characteristics were balanced (SMD < 0.1). The LB group had the lowest 72-h AUC and overall NRS score compared to PCIA ( Conclusion: For VATS postoperative analgesia, LB is associated with favorable analgesia and earlier recovery. It may be cost-effective, depending on acceptable WTP thresholds. PCIA and R remain safe and viable alternatives. These findings warrant further validation in large-scale prospective studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.