Key result
This letter to the editor critiques a prior study comparing epidural and intravenous analgesia, arguing that methodological flaws invalidate its findings regarding postoperative myocardial ischemia.
Why the study?
Does thoracic epidural analgesia compared to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia reduce postoperative myocardial ischemia in high-risk patients undergoing aortic surgery?
Population
Patients undergoing aortic surgery (critique of a prior study with n=91)
Comparison
Thoracic epidural analgesia vs Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia
Design
Editorial
Follow-up
24 hours (criticized as too short)
Authors
Loading...
This letter highlights significant methodological flaws in a prior study comparing epidural and intravenous analgesia for preventing myocardial ischemia after aortic surgery.
Does thoracic epidural analgesia compared to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia reduce postoperative myocardial ischemia in high-risk patients undergoing aortic surgery?
This letter highlights significant methodological flaws in a prior study comparing epidural and intravenous analgesia for preventing myocardial ischemia after aortic surgery.
León-Casasola et al. (1998) conducted a letter in Postoperative myocardial ischemia after aortic surgery (n=91). Epidural analgesia vs. Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia was evaluated on Postoperative myocardial ischemia. This letter to the editor critiques a prior study comparing epidural and intravenous analgesia, arguing that methodological flaws invalidate its findings regarding postoperative myocardial ischemia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: