Thoracolumbar interfascial plane block for postoperative analgesia in spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block in Patients Undergoing Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

As 2 novel peripheral nerve blocks, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block can relieve postoperative pain in spinal surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ESPB versus TLIP block in patients undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

An extensive search of English online databases, including PubMed, Web of Sciences, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Chinese online databases like Wanfang Data, CNKI, and CQVIP until March 31, 2023, with no language restrictions, was performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis are based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and have been registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) with registered ID: CRD42023420987.

RESULTS

Five studies involving 457 patients were eligible for inclusion in this study. Compared with TLIP block, ESPB had lower postoperative opioid consumption at postoperative 48 hours (standard mean difference =-1.31, 95% CI:-2.54 to -0.08, P =0.04, I2 =80%) and postoperative pain score at postoperative 24 hours (standard mean difference =-0.72, 95% CI=-1.43 to -0.02, P =0.04, I2 =95%) in patients undergoing spine surgery. Complications associated with ESPB and TLIP block were not reported in the included studies.

DISCUSSION

ESPB and TLIP block are 2 novel and effective block methods. Patients receiving ESPB had lower postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores compared with patients receiving TLIP block; there was no statistically significant difference's between the 2 groups in intraoperative opioid consumption, adverse events, and rescue analgesia.

Postoperative quality of recovery with erector spinae plane block or thoracolumbar interfascial plane block after major spinal surgery: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Major spinal surgery causes severe postoperative pain. The present randomized, controlled, prospective study tested the short- and long-term effects of thoracolumbar interfascial and erector spinae plane blocks on patient-centered outcomes for major lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

Sixty adult patients were randomly assigned to receive either bilateral thoracolumbar interfascial plane or erector spinae plane block after anesthesia induction using bupivacaine 0.25%, 20 mL. The primary outcome of this study was the Quality of Recovery-40 score in the postoperative 24th hour. Secondary outcomes were Comprehensive Complication Index scores, postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, first rescue analgesic administration time, and complication incidence.

RESULTS

The recovery scores of both blocks at the postoperative 24th hour were similar, with a median thoracolumbar interfascial plane block of 178 (IQR 173-180) and an erector spinae plane block of 175 (IQR 168.7-182) (p = 0.717). Thoracolumbar interfascial plane block reduced area under the curve pain with movement over 24 h compared with erector spinae plane block (p = 0.024). The pain scores between the groups were similar at all time points (p > 0.05), except the 24th hour with movement in the thoracolumbar interfascial plane block compared with the erector spinae plane block [median 3 (IQR 2-4)] vs. 4 (IQR 3-5), respectively] (p = 0.019). No differences were recorded between the block groups regarding postoperative 24th-h oxycodone consumption, time to first opioid intake, and complication incidence (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both blocks resulted in similar quality of recovery in the postoperative 24-h period in major spinal surgery and were effective in terms of analgesia.

Regional anesthesia in spine surgery: A narrative review

Background: Regional anesthesia, which refers to the use of anesthetics to provide analgesia to a specific body part or nervous innervation territory, has become increasingly popular in the field of spine surgery. With the application of these techniques, it has been postulated that patients will require less systemic analgesia, intraoperatively and postoperatively. The authors of this narrative review discuss the common regional anesthetic modalities applied to spine surgery, in addition to patient selection criteria, success in patients with multiple comorbid illnesses, and its adoption by surgeons. Materials and Methods: An advanced search was performed in the PubMed database to obtain Englishlanguage articles discussing regional anesthesia, awake spine surgery, and postoperative complications. Articles were screened for relevance, and 47 articles were incorporated into this narrative review. Results: Classic neuraxial and paraspinal techniques have allowed surgeons to perform posterior decompression, fusion, and revision procedures. Transversus abdominus plane and quadratus lumborum blocks have enabled better pain control in patients undergoing surgeries requiring anterior or lateral approaches. Documented benefits of regional anesthesia include shorter operative time, improved pain control and hemodynamic stability, as well as decreased cost and length of stay. Several case series have demonstrated the success of these techniques in highly comorbid patients. Conclusion: Regional anesthesia provides an exciting opportunity to make surgical treatment possible for spine patients with significant comorbidities. Although additional randomized controlled trials are necessary to further refine patient selection criteria, current data demonstrates its safety and efficacy in the operating room.

The efficacy of thoracolumbar interfascial plane block for lumbar spinal surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The intent of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of thoracolumbar interfascial plane block (TLIP) for pain control after lumbar spinal surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published on PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases up to February 10, 2023, comparing TLIP with no or sham block or wound infiltration for lumbar spinal surgeries were included. Pain scores, total analgesic consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs were eligible. Comparing TLIP with no block or sham block, the meta-analysis showed a significant decrease of pain scores at rest and movement at 2 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 24 h. Pooled analysis of four studies showed a significant difference in pain scores at rest between TLIP and wound infiltration group at 8 h but not at 2 h, 12 h, and 24 h. Total analgesic consumption was significantly reduced with TLIP block as compared to no block/sham block and wound infiltration. TLIP block also significantly reduced PONV. GRADE assessment of the evidence was moderate.

CONCLUSION

Moderate quality evidence indicates that TLIP blocks are effective in pain control after lumbar spinal surgeries. TLIP reduces pain scores at rest and movement for up to 24 h, reduces total analgesic consumption, and the incidence of PONV. However, evidence of its efficacy as compared to wound infiltration of local anesthetics is scarce. Results should be interpreted with caution owing low to moderate quality of the primary studies and marked heterogeneity.

Ultrasound-Guided Modified Thoracolumbar Fascial Plane Block in Tianji Robot-Assisted Lumbar Internal Fixation: A Prospective, Randomized, and Non-Inferiority Study

Purpose

Ultrasound-guided modified thoracolumbar fascial plane block (MTLIP) has been reported effective for postoperative pain control following lumbar surgery. Although trauma of the Tianji robot-assisted lumbar internal fixation is reduced, the degree of pain cannot be ignored.MTLIP may improve operation efficiency and reduce puncture complications.This study aimed to explore whether MTLIP is not inferior to thoracolumbar fascial plane block (TLIP) in the treatment of lumbar internal fixation.

Methods

This prospective double-blinded, non-inferiority randomized trial enrolled patients underwent Tianji robot-assisted lumbar internal fixation between April and August 2022 to either MTLIP or TLIP. The primary outcome was an effective dermatomal block area after 30 min. Secondary outcomes included the numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, nerve block operation time, puncture times, image clarity, patient satisfaction, intraoperative opioid consumption, complications/adverse reactions, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

Results

Sixty participants were randomized to MTLIP (n=30) and TLIP (n=30). The effective dermatomal block area 30 min after block was non-inferior in the MTLIP group (283.6 ± 62.6 cm²) compared with the TLIP group (261.4±53.2 cm²) (P=0.145; estimated mean difference: -22.17, 95% CI: -52.19, 7.85; smaller than the non-inferiority margin of 39.5). Compared with TLIP, MTLIP showed shorter operation time, smaller puncture times, and better target definition and satisfaction scores (all P<0.001). Sufentanil amount, remifentanil amount, PCIA sufentanil dosage, parecoxib amount, NRS scores (increased with time in the two groups but without inter-group differences), and complications were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05).

Conclusion

This non-inferiority trial supports the hypothesis that MTLIP yields a non-inferior effective dermatomal block area compared with TLIP for Tianji robot-assisted lumbar internal fixation.

Clinical Trials Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200058687);.

Postoperative analgesia for complex spinal surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Complex spinal surgery is associated with significant postoperative pain. The purpose of this paper is to review recent literature on postoperative pain management in adult and adolescent patients having complex spinal surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

We conducted a literature search using the Medline database for relevant publications from 2020 to 2022 on postoperative pain after complex spinal surgery. Although opioids remain the mainstay to manage pain after complex spinal surgery, they are associated with adverse effects. Multimodal analgesia may be used to reduce these adverse effects by combining different drugs targeting different parts of the pain pathway. Recent publications suggest continuous low dose fentanyl or morphine infusion, methadone, intravenous paracetamol and ibuprofen, ketorolac, ketamine, magnesium infusion, lidocaine infusion and dexmedetomidine appear to be effective and safe to manage pain after complex spinal surgery. Regional techniques including bilateral erector spinae block, interfascial plane block and intrathecal morphine also appear to be effective and safe.

SUMMARY

Pain management after complex spinal surgery remains challenging. Therefore, further studies are still required to determine the optimal multimodal analgesic regimen for these patients.

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA IN SPINAL SURGERY: COULD IT BE THE SOLUTION FOR DIFFICULT INTUBATION

This article includes two topics - anesthesia for spinal surgery and difficult airway, both of them are linked with the same topic, which is regional anesthesia. In recent years, regional anesthesia for spinal surgery has gained a great popularity, where neuraxial blocks are the first choice. Regional anesthesia seems to have benefits against general anesthesia due to lower rate of perioperative and postoperative complications, lower cost and length of stay. This is more evident in elderly population or patients with comorbidities. On the other hand, difficult airway is the life threatening condition and requires increased attention. There are many methods and tools for managing difficult airways, but there are few supporters of regional anesthesia as an option or solution in these cases. Of course, special attention is required during regional anesthesia in a patient with difficult airway, the decision must be correct, and an anesthesiologist must have a preformulated strategy for airway management. However, does not the same happen even when we apply general anesthesia?

Analgesic efficacy of erector spinae plane block in lumbar spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has gained popularity for perioperative analgesia in various surgeries. However, its efficacy in lumbar surgery remains unclear. This review aimed to determine whether ESPB could improve analgesic efficacy in lumbar spine surgery.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

SETTING

Perioperative setting.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery under general anesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

We searched the databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science etc. for published eligible controlled trials comparing ESPB with control (no block/sham block) in lumbar spine surgery.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was opioid consumption in the first 24 h after surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies comprising 665 participants were included. Compared to the control, ESPB reduced the opioid (morphine milligram equivalents) consumption significantly 24 h after surgery [mean difference (MD) = -14.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), -21.03 to -8.07; P < 0.0001] and lowered the pain scores at various time points (at rest or during movement) for 48 h after surgery. ESPB increased the patient satisfaction score (0-10) (MD = 2.38; 95% CI, 2.10 to 2.66; P < 0.0001), decreased the postoperative nausea and vomiting [risk ratio (RR) = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.67; P = 0.001], and minimized the length of hospital stay (MD = -1.24 days; 95% CI, -2.31 to -0.18; P = 0.02). Furthermore, subgroup analysis revealed additional reduction in opioid consumption by the block approach at the vertebral level of incision/operation than that at the fixed thoracic/lumbar level. However, considerable heterogeneity and low-grade quality of evidence were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

ESPB provided effective postoperative analgesia resulting in better patient satisfaction and recovery with decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing lumbar surgery compared to the control. However, the low-grade quality of evidence compromised the findings, therefore further high-quality of evidence is required. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021233362.

Impact of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block on outcomes after lumbar spinal fusion: a retrospective propensity score matched study of 242 patients

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the impact of bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane blocks on pain and opioid-related outcomes within a standardized care pathway for lumbar fusion.

METHODS

A retrospective propensity score matched cohort study. Clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical records of patients who underwent lumbar fusion (January 2019-July 2020). Propensity score matching based on common confounders was used to match patients who received or did not receive blocks in a 1:1 ratio. Primary outcomes were Numeric Rating Scale pain scores (0-10) and opioid consumption (morphine equivalent dose) in the first 24 hours after surgery (median (IQR)). Secondary outcomes included length of stay and opioid-related side effects.

RESULTS

Of 1846 patients identified, 242 were matched and analyzed. Total 24-hour opioid consumption was significantly lower in the erector spinae plane block group (30 mg (0, 144); without-blocks: 45 mg (0, 225); p=0.03). There were no significant differences in pain scores in the postanesthesia care unit (with blocks: 4 (0, 9); without blocks: 4 (0,8); p=0.984) or on the nursing floor (with blocks: 4 (0,8); without blocks: 4 (0,8); p=0.134). Total length of stay was 5 hours shorter in the block group (76 hours (21, 411); without blocks: 81 (25, 268); p=0.001). Fewer patients who received blocks required postoperative antiemetic administration (with blocks: n=77 (64%); without blocks: n=97 (80%); p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Erector spinae plane blocks were associated with clinically irrelevant reductions in 24-hour opioid consumption and no improvement in pain scores after lumbar fusion. The routine use of these blocks in the setting of a comprehensive care pathway for lumbar fusion may not be warranted.