Volk 2003.

Methods	Parallel RCT Ethics committee: approved Informed consents: written informed consents obtained Site: Germany Setting: university hospital Dates of data collection: unspecified Funding: unspecified Registration: unspecified
Participants	26 participants; mean age: 66 years; sex distribution: 5 females and 21 males Inclusion criteria Patients undergoing CABG for stable anginal with 3‐vessel disease Exclusion criteria LVEF < 0.4; left ventricular end diastolic pressure ≥ 17 mmHg Clinically significant preexisting pulmonary diseases (determined by clinical examination, chest radiography, lung function tests, and blood gas analyses) Insulin‐dependent diabetes mellitus Clinically relevant renal, hepatic, or cerebrovascular disease Patients with preoperative signs of infection (white cell blood count > 12,000/microlitre, body temperature > 38 degrees C, C‐reactive protein > 5 mg/dL), chronic inflammatory disease Patients treated with cyclo‐oxygenase inhibitors, ticlopidine, or other drugs inhibiting thrombocyte functions within the last 7 days before the operation Emergencies
Interventions	Intervention Epidural analgesia (N = 13) Comparator Systemic analgesia (N = 13) Premedication: oral midazolam 0.1 mg/kg Induction: etomidate 0.2 mg/kg Maintenance: midazolam, sufentanil, and pancuronium Surgery: CABG with CPB with a membrane oxygenator
Outcomes	Relevant to this review Pain scores Haemodynamic variables Others Inflammatory response Stress response
Notes	Correspondence: email sent 18 November 2018; no reply Conflict of interest: not reported DOI: 10.1016/S1043‐4666(03)00090‐5
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomization was performed using computer‐generated random numbers
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Sealed opaque envelopes
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No loss to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All results reported
Other bias	Low risk	Groups well balanced, except perhaps for sex distribution