Erector Spinae Block

The Analgesic Effect of Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block in Median Sternotomy Cardiac Surgery in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic effect of erector spinae plane block in adults undergoing median sternotomy cardiac surgery.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed databases from inception to January 2024 were searched. The study has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023470375).

PARTICIPANTS

Eight randomized controlled trials involving 543 patients, comparing with no block or sham block, were included, whether it was a single injection or continuous.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcomes were pain scores and opioid consumption. Erector spinae plane block reduced pain scores immediately after extubation (mean difference [MD], -1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.67 to -0.71; p for heterogeneity = 0.10), at 6 hours after extubation (MD, -1.96; 95% CI, -2.85 to -1.08; p for heterogeneity < 0.0001), and at 12 hours after extubation (MD, -0.98; 95% CI, -1.55 to -0.40; p for heterogeneity < 0.00001). The decrease in pain scores reached the minimal clinically important difference within 6 hours. Opioid consumption 24 hours after surgery decreased by 35.72 mg of oral morphine equivalents (95% CI, -50.88 to -20.57; p for heterogeneity < 0.0001). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of results. The quality of primary outcomes was rated as very low to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Erector spinae plane block decreased pain scores within 12 hours after extubation, reached the minimal clinically important difference within 6 hours, and decreased opioid consumption 24 hours after surgery, based on data of very low to moderate quality. However, high-quality randomized controlled trials are necessary to validate these findings.

Regional Anesthesia Techniques in Modern Neuroanesthesia Practice: A Narrative Review of the Clinical Evidence

Neurosurgical procedures are often associated with significant postoperative pain that is both underrecognized and undertreated. Given the potentially undesirable side effects associated with general anesthesia and with various pharmacological analgesic regimens, regional anesthetic techniques have gained in popularity as alternatives for providing both anesthesia and analgesia for the neurosurgical patient. The aim of this narrative review is to present an overview of the regional techniques that have been incorporated and continue to be incorporated into modern neuroanesthesia practice, presenting in a comprehensive way the evidence, where available, in support of such practice for the neurosurgical patient.

Comparison of efficacy of erector spinae plane block, thoracic paravertebral block, and erector spinae plane block and thoracic paravertebral block combination for acute pain after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB), thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB), and ESPB and TPVB combination on acute pain after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).

METHODS

Seventy-five patients were evaluated (three groups: ESPB, TPVB, or combined ESPB-TPVB [comb-group], each 25 patients). All interventions were performed with the same volume of bupivacaine (20 mL). Primary outcome was VAS (Visual Analog Scale) during the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes were postoperative morphine consumption and rescue analgesic requirements.

RESULTS

VAS during rest and coughing of TPVB was significantly higher compared to other groups (in all measurements compared to comb-group; and in all but 24 hours measurement to ESPB) ESPB and comb-group had similar VAS in all measurements (e.g., median VAS in ESPB, TPVB and comb-group at 8^th hour: 3-4-2 [P=0.014] during coughing and 2-3-1 in rest [P<0.001], respectively). Morphine consumption was statistically significantly higher in TPVB than comb-group (ESPB: 15.28 mg; TPVB: 19.30 mg; ESPB+TPVB: 10.00 mg) (P=0.003). Rescue analgesic requirement was statistically significantly higher in the TPVB group than comb-group (P=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

ESPB alone and the combination of ESPB and TPVB provided superior primary outcomes compared to TPVB alone. Morphine and rescue analgesic consumptions were higher in TPVB than comb-group. ESPB and comb-group were statistically similar in terms of primary and secondary outcomes. This study is one of the first studies using the combination of ESBP and TPVB for pain after VATS, and shows the efficacy of this approach.

Comparison between erector spinae plane block and paravertebral block regarding postoperative analgesic consumption following breast surgery: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Pain control following breast surgery is of utmost importance in order to reduce the chance of chronic pain development, and facilitate early rehabilitation. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a recently developed regional anaesthesia procedure successfully used for different types of surgical procedures including thoracic and abdominal surgeries.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial was conducted on 90 patients who were scheduled for modified radical mastectomy (MRM). Patients were randomly categorized into groups I (women who underwent ESPB), II (women who underwent paravertebral block (PVB), and III (women who underwent general anaesthesia).

RESULTS

The ESPB (4.9 ± 1.2 mg) and PVB (5.8 ± 1.3 mg) groups had significantly lower total morphine consumption than the control group had (16.4 ± 3.1 mg; p < 0.001). Notably, patients in the ESPB group had insignificantly lower morphine consumption than those in the PVB group had (p = 0.076). Moreover, patients in the ESPB and PVB groups had a significantly longer time to first required anaesthesia than those in the control group (7.9 ± 1.2 versus 7.5 ± 0.9 versus 2 ± 1.2 h, respectively; p < 0.001). The postoperative visual analog scale scores were lower in the ESPB and PVB groups than in the control group on the first 24 h after the procedure (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ESPB and PVB provide effective postoperative analgesia for women undergoing MRM. The ESPB appears to be as effective as the PVB.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered before the enrolment of the first patient at the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry ( www.pactr.org ) database. Identification number for the registry is (PACTR202008836682092).

Intrathecal Morphine for Analgesia in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Double-blinded Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Intrathecal morphine decreases postoperative pain in standard cardiac surgery. Its safety and effectiveness have not been adequately evaluated in minimally invasive cardiac surgery. The authors hypothesized that intrathecal morphine would decrease postoperative morphine consumption after minimally invasive cardiac surgery.

METHODS

In this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial, patients undergoing robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass received either intrathecal morphine (5 mcg/kg) or intrathecal saline before surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative morphine equivalent consumption in the first 24 h after surgery; secondary outcomes included pain scores, side effects, and patient satisfaction. Pain was assessed via visual analog scale at 1, 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after intensive care unit arrival. Opioid-related side effects (nausea/vomiting, pruritus, urinary retention, respiratory depression) were assessed daily. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with the Revised American Pain Society Outcome Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients were randomized to receive intrathecal morphine (n = 37) or intrathecal placebo (n = 42), with 70 analyzed (morphine 33, placebo 37). Intrathecal morphine patients required significantly less median (25th to 75th percentile) morphine equivalents compared to placebo during first postoperative 24 h (28 [16 to 46] mg vs. 59 [41 to 79] mg; difference, -28 [95% CI, -40 to -18]; P < 0.001) and second postoperative 24 h (0 [0 to 2] mg vs. 5 [0 to 6] mg; difference, -3.3 [95% CI, -5 to 0]; P < 0.001), exhibited significantly lower visual analog scale pain scores at rest and cough at all postoperative timepoints (overall treatment effect, -4.1 [95% CI, -4.9 to -3.3] and -4.7 [95% CI, -5.5 to -3.9], respectively; P < 0.001), and percent time in severe pain (10 [0 to 40] vs. 40 [20 to 70]; P = 0.003) during the postoperative period. Mild nausea was more common in the intrathecal morphine group (36% vs. 8%; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

When given before induction of anesthesia for totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass, intrathecal morphine decreases use of postoperative opioids and produces significant postoperative analgesia for 48 h.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Erector spinae plane block combined with local infiltration analgesia for total hip arthroplasty: A randomized, placebo controlled, clinical trial

The erector spinae plane block is an emerging analgesic technique, which is gaining popularity for a large number of procedures. The majority of publications are at the thoracic level and almost all indicate some benefit to patients. However, there have been relatively few randomized controlled trials and even fewer studies at the lumbar level. The aim of this study was to assess whether the erector spinae plane block at the lumbar level would confer early analgesic benefits and improve the quality of recovery in patients undergoing elective unilateral primary hip arthroplasty. Sixty-four patients were randomized to receive an erector spinae plane block at the third lumbar vertebra with either 30milliliters (ml) of 0.2% ropivacaine or 30 ml of 0.9% saline. The patient, anesthetist and assessor were blinded to allocation. The primary outcome was pain on movement at 6 h (numeric rating scale 0-10) with a reduction of 2 points considered clinically significant. Secondary outcomes included quality of recovery (QoR-15 score), mobilization and length of stay. In this study there was no appreciable analgesic benefit to adding an erector spinae plane block to patients who already receive neuraxial blocks, local anesthetic infiltration and oral multimodal analgesia for elective primary total hip arthroplasty. Both groups were found to have relatively low pain scores and a high quality of recovery with no significant difference in mobilization or length of stay.

Erector spinae plane versus paravertebral nerve blocks for postoperative analgesia after breast surgery: a randomized clinical trial

Background

Paravertebral nerve blocks (PVBs) are frequently used to treat pain during and following breast surgery, but have various undesirable risks such as pneumothorax. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) also provides perioperative breast analgesia, but is purported to be easier to administer with a favorable safety profile. However, it remains unknown if the new ESPB provides comparable analgesia as the decades-old PVB technique.

Methods

Subjects undergoing unilateral or bilateral non-mastectomy breast surgery were randomized to a single-injection ESPB or PVB in a subject-blinded fashion (ropivacaine 0.5% with epinephrine; 20 mL unilateral or 16 mL/side for bilateral). We hypothesized that (1) analgesia would be non-inferior in the recovery room as measured on a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) with ESPB, and (2) opioid consumption would be non-inferior in the operating and recovery rooms with ESPB.

Results

Both pain scores and opioid consumption were higher in subjects with ESPBs (n=50) than PVBs (n=50; median NRS 3.0 vs 0; 95% CI −3.0 to 0; p=0.0011; and median morphine equivalents 2.0 vs 1.5 mg; 95% CI −1.2 to −0.1; p=0.0043). No block-related adverse events occurred in either group.

Conclusions

PVBs provided superior analgesia and reduced opioid requirements following non-mastectomy breast surgery. To compare the relatively rare complications between the techniques will require a sample size 1–2 orders of magnitude greater than the current investigation; however, without a dramatic improvement in safety profile for ESPBs, it appears that PVBs are superior to ESPBs for postoperative analgesia after non-mastectomy breast surgery.

Trial registration number

NCT03549234.

Interfascial plane blocks

Many novel interfascial plane blocks have been developed in the last 10 years in the effort to improve perioperative pain management that are safe, efficacious, efficient, and inexpensive. These blocks have been widely adopted into clinical practice despite relatively few high-quality clinical investigations of the techniques and how they affect perioperative outcomes. This article defines interfascial plane blocks, discusses the potential benefits, reviews the most common techniques and evidence supporting their indication, and guides clinicians in selecting an appropriate interfascial plane block for different types of surgical procedures.