Continuous nerve block versus thoracic epidural analgesia for post-operative pain of pectus excavatum repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 1 Study characteristics

Study	Nation	Study design	Treatment arm	Period	Number of patients	Age (years)	Level of catheter	Medications	HI
Hall 2014 [16]	USA	Retrospective case-control study	PVB	2009/06– 2011/08	10	15.5 ± 2.3	T6 TP	7ml/hr 0.2% R	NR
			TEA	2010/10– 2012/01	10	14.5 ± 2.5	T5	7ml/hr 0.2% R	NR
Loftus 2016 [34]	USA	Retrospective observation study	PVB	2009/01– 2012/12	28	NR	NR	NR	NR
			TEA		80	NR	NR	NR	NR
Beltran 2017 [17]	Canada	Retrospective observation study	PVB	2011– 2013	7	15.7 ± 1.3	T45,T56	0.25–0.5 mg/kg 0.2% R with PCA	4.8 ± 1.6
			TEA		8	15.8 ± 1.6	T567	0.1% R or 0.125% B with fentanyl 2mcg/ml	4.5 ± 1.4
Muhly 2019 [18]	USA	Prospective observation multi-institutional study	PVB	2014/6– 2015/8	56	14.9 ± 2.8	D	D	4.8 ± 1.6
			TEA		114	14.9 ± 2.4	D	D	4.5 ± 1.4
Bliss 2022 [25]	USA	Retrospective observation study	ESP	NR	30	15.4 ± 1.2	T5–6	0.5% R 6ml/hrinitial (0.25 mg/kg/hr max)	7.3 ± 1.6
			TEA		30	14.9 ± 1.3	NR	0.2% R with hydromorphine 2–5mcg/ml	4.2 ± 1.4
Santana 2022 [23]	USA	Retrospective observation study	ESP	2014/1– 2020/1	19	15.6 ± 1.8	T4–T6	0.2% R with 1mcg/ml clonidine	5.2 ± 1.1
			TEA		41	15 ± 2.2	NA	NR	5.5 ± 2.2
Walter 2023 [24]	USA	Retrospective observation study	ESP	2019/1– 2021/5	97	15.3 ± 2.3	T5 TP	0.125–0.2% R 6–8ml/hr with clonidine 0.5mcg/ml	4.8 ± 4.6
			TEA		114	15 ± 3	T45T56	0.2% R 10–12ml/hr	4.9 ± 4.6

TP: transverse process; R: ropivacaine; NR: not reported; B: bupivacaine; D: differs in each hospital

ISSN: 1471-2253