Erector spinae plane versus fascia iliaca block after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial comparing analgesic effectiveness and motor block

Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block Versus Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) in Pediatric Hip Surgery: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness and safety of the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and lumbar erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric hip surgeries is limited mainly to case reports. This study assessed the efficacy of ultrasound-guided PENG block versus lumbar ESPB under spinal anesthesia.

METHODS

Ninety patients aged 2 to 7 years, ASA I-III scheduled for hip surgery were randomly assigned to 3 equal groups, each receiving the PENG block group (n=30), the ESPB group (n=30), or the control group (n=30). After the spinal anesthesia, the block was performed with 0.5 kg/mL of 0.2% ropivacaine. The primary outcome was the pain scores (FLACC) 48 hours after surgery. The secondary outcomes included postoperative FLACC pain scores, neutrophile-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and total opioid consumption.

RESULTS

The FLACC score was significantly lower in the lumbar ESPB and PENG groups compared with the control group ( P <0.0001) at all time points. The NLR and PLR levels were substantially lower in the PENG and lumbar ESPB groups ( P <0.0001) compared with the control group. The NLR and PLR levels were significantly lower in the PENG and lumbar ESPB groups compared with the control group ( P <0.0001). The total opioid consumption was significantly lower in the PENG and lumbar ESPB groups compared with the control group ( P <0.0001). Forty-three percent of children in the PENG group and 50% of children in the lumbar ESPB group did not require opioids postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The PENG block and the lumbar ESPB provide efficient postoperative analgesia in children undergoing hip surgery. The PENG block and lumbar ESPB lower cumulative opioid consumption and the stress response to surgery, expressed by NLR and PLR levels.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Regional anesthesia for hip surgery: A review of current approaches and their application to clinical practice

Hip surgery is extremely common and ranges from surgery for hip fracture to elective procedures in younger adults. Pain can mark the postoperative period and compromise functional recovery. Nevertheless, major comorbidities may occur in the perioperative period, especially in elderly fragile patients. The approach to patients undergoing hip surgery has significantly evolved, focusing on multimodal strategies to optimize pain control while minimizing side effects, prompting patients' recovery. The seek for motor-sparing, analgesic techniques with a better risk benefit profile has promoted the application of new peripheral nerve blocks, with special attention paid to the newest fascial plane blocks. However, significant interest is addressed toward other outcomes (such major comorbidities and deaths) that may influence intermediate and long-term recovery. Specific strategies have been investigated to improve outcomes after hip surgery in elderly patients, considering the higher risk for complications, including delirium. In this narrative review, we aim to summarize the role of regional anesthesia and analgesia in the context of hip surgery by detailing on the effects of regional anesthesia on major outcomes. Considering the specific innervation of hip joint, we summarize the available evidence on newer peripheral nerve blocks for hip patients by focusing on potential complications associated with each technique, especially the occurrence of motor block. In this review, we aim to provide an updated and concise overview of the available evidence to help the reader planning the most appropriate strategy for hip surgery.

Efficacy and Safety of Pericapsular Nerve Group Block (PENG) in Hip Surgery Under General Anaesthesia: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a novel ultrasound-guided regional technique that may provide analgesia to patients undergoing hip surgery. It has been extensively studied in recent years, but the evidence of superiority over other regional anaesthetic techniques is inconclusive. This review aimed to compare outcomes of the PENG block in patients undergoing hip surgery with standard techniques under general anaesthesia. Methods: PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed throughout the preparation of this review. Randomised trials from electronic databases were included. We investigated postoperative pain scores, required analgesia, and adverse events associated with the block. Results: Ten studies satisfied the criteria to be included in the meta-analysis. Data from 646 patients were analysed, in which 321 patients received PENG block and 325 were included in the comparative groups. Pain scores at rest, at 24 h (p = 0.04) and 48 h (p = 0.02) were lower in patients who had received the PENG block. This group also required a smaller amount of opioids at 24 h after the procedure, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.53); while a similar non-significant reduction in opioid consumption was also observed at 48 h. Although PENG seems to delay the time to the first analgesic request, we failed to prove a statistically significant difference (p = 0.83). Patient satisfaction also seems to be better in the PENG group, but not in a statistically significant way. No important side effects related to the block were described. Conclusions: PENG block for major hip surgery offers better postoperative analgesia, with possibly less opioid consumption. It seems to prolong the time to the first analgesic but does not significantly affect common side effects of anaesthesia/analgesia such as PONV or duration of hospital stay.

The Analgesic Mechanism and Recent Clinical Application of Erector Spinae Plane Block: A Narrative Review

Now, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is widely used in various thoracolumbar surgeries. It has unique advantages: simple and convenient operation, low safety risks, and reduced opioid use. The ESPB is used in thoracic surgery, abdominal surgery, and spinal surgery. There are also relevant research reports on postoperative analgesia during general anesthesia surgery. This article searches the PubMed and Web of Science databases to find and screen relevant studies on ESPB since 2019 and retrospectively summarizes the current indications of ESPB. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane bias risk tool. The results showed that the current research on ESPB generally provides low-level clinical evidence. The complex anatomy of the erector spinae muscles is both responsible for its unique advantages and restricts its development. Few anatomical studies have clearly and completely demonstrated the diffusion relationship of local anesthetics among the anatomical structures of the erector spinal muscles. The uncontrollability of the diffusion plane prevents ESPB from being applied on a wider scale with a high level of evidence. To further clarify the scope of application of ESPB and achieve the best analgesic effect, in the future, we should focus on the unique anatomical course and distribution of the erector spinal muscles and their fascia and nerves. It is necessary to combine anatomical, imaging, and histological methods to obtain high-quality evidence to guide clinical application.

Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Hip Fractures

The incidence of hip fractures has continued to increase as life expectancy increases. Hip fracture is one of the leading causes of increased morbidity and mortality in the geriatric population. Early surgical treatment (<48 h) is often recommended to reduce morbidity/mortality. In addition, adequate pain management is crucial to optimize functional recovery and early mobilization. Pain management often consists of multimodal therapy which includes non-opioids, opioids, and regional anesthesia techniques. In this review, we describe the anatomical innervation of the hip joint and summarize the commonly used peripheral nerve blocks to provide pain relief for hip fractures. We also outline literature evidence that shows each block's efficacy in providing adequate pain relief. The recent discovery of a nerve block that may provide adequate sensory blockade of the posterior capsule of the hip is also described. Finally, we report a surgeon's perspective on nerve blocks for hip fractures.

Comparison of the Analgesic Effect of Pericapsular Nerve Group Block and Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block in Elective Hip Surgery

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) and lumbar erector spinae plane (L-ESP) blocks, both administered with a high volume (40 mL) of local anesthetic (LA), for multimodal postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing hip surgery. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized study that included 75 adult patients who were divided into three equal groups: control, PENG, and L-ESP. The study compared pain intensity, morphine consumption, time to first morphine request, and postoperative satisfaction between the control group, which received standard multimodal analgesia, and the block groups, which received PENG or L-ESP block in addition to multimodal analgesia. The numerical rating scale (NRS) was used to measure pain intensity. Results: The results showed that the block groups had lower pain intensity scores and morphine consumption, a longer time to the first morphine request, and higher postoperative satisfaction compared to the control group. The median maximum NRS score during the first 12 h was four in the control group, two in the PENG group, and three in the L-ESP group. The control group (21.52 ± 9.63 mg) consumed more morphine than the two block groups (PENG, 11.20 ± 7.55 mg; L-ESP, 12.88 ± 8.87 mg) and requested morphine 6.8 h earlier and 5 h earlier than the PENG and L-ESP groups, respectively. The control group (median 3) had the lowest Likert satisfaction scores, while the PENG group (median 4) had the lowest NRS scores (L-ESP, median 4). Conclusions: The application of PENG or L-ESP blocks with high-volume LA in patients undergoing hip surgery reduces the need for postoperative analgesia and improves the quality of multimodal analgesia.

Lumbar erector spinae plane block versus infrainguinal fascia iliaca compartment block for pain management after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided facia iliaca compartment (FIC) and erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks in managing postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty surgery.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients were randomized into 2 groups (n = 30): one that received FIC blocks and one that received ESP blocks. FIC and ESP blocks were performed with 30 mL 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of the surgery. The patients received intravenous tramadol and patient-controlled postoperative analgesia. The pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

The dynamic pain scores on movement in the postoperative first hour were significantly lower in the ESP block group than in the FIC block group (3 [2-4] vs 4 [2-5], respectively; P = .035). Data are expressed as median (25th-75th percentiles). Postoperative opioid consumption within the first postoperative 8 hours was significantly higher in the FIC block group than in the ESP block group (80 mg [61-100] vs 100 mg [80-120], respectively; P = .010). The adverse effects of opioids did not differ between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

ESP and infrainguinal FIC blocks provided similar postoperative analgesia 24 hours after total hip arthroplasty. The ESP block is more beneficial than the FIC block in terms of pain scores and opioid consumption in the early hours of the postoperative period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT05621161).

Surgical versus nonsurgical management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis based on spinal canal cross-sectional area

Disability and pain associated with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) result in a significant burden on both the healthcare costs and patients' quality of life. Currently, there exists controversy regarding employment of either nonsurgical management (NSM) or surgical management (SM) in a clinical setting. Spinal canal cross-sectional area (SCA) has been an important morphological parameter for the analysis of LDS. However, there is lack of research about the comparative value of NSM and SM according to SCA. Moreover, previous research have not yet evaluated the clinical most suitable cutoff values of SCA. The objective of this research was to evaluate the effective of NSM and SM for LDS using SCA as an objective morphological parameter. The axial T2 magnetic resonance imaging images were obtained from each patient. We collected SCA samples from 149 patients with LDS. 72 patients underwent SM and the rest did NSM. We measured SCA at the L4/5 LDS on magnetic resonance imaging using a picture archiving and communications system. We measured SCA at the intervertebral disk posterior border, turning down to reach the facet joint side on the opposite edge at the L4/5 level. The average SCA value was 114.34 ± 48.11 mm2 in the NSM group and 69.88 ± 27.87 mm2 in the SM group. Therefore, the SM group had considerably lower SCA (P < .001). In view of the effectiveness of SCA as a prediction factor of surgical option, Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis show the optimal cutoff value for SCA as 83.21 mm2, with 70.8% sensitivity, 71.4% specificity, and an area under the curve of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.73-0.87). The narrower the SCA, the higher the probability of SM. Thus, it is proposed that to evaluate surgical decision making, the pain physician should carefully inspect the SCA.

Comparison of ultrasound-guided continuous erector spinae plane block versus continuous paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing proximal femur surgeries

BACKGROUND

Proximal femur fracture surgeries have become increasingly prevalent, presenting unique challenges for postoperative pain management due to patient demographics and comorbidities. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has emerged as a relatively safe alternative to paravertebral block (PVB). Our aim was to compare ultrasound-guided continuous ESPB with continuous PVB for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing proximal femur surgeries under spinal anesthesia.

METHODS

A prospective randomized interventional study was conducted on 60 patients between 18 and 60 years of age undergoing proximal femur surgeries under spinal anesthesia with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II between January 2019 and April 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either ultrasound-guided continuous ESPB (Group E, n = 30) or ultrasound-guided continuous PVB (Group P, n = 30) using a computer-generated randomization table. The mean maximum visual analog scale (VAS) score, VAS score in the first 24 h, the time of rescue analgesia, and total requirement of rescue analgesia were assessed.

RESULTS

The maximum VAS score within the first 24 h was numerically higher in Group P but statistically insignificant (p-value 0.279). VAS scores at 0, 1, 2, 6, and 18 h postoperatively were comparable in both groups. However, at the 24-h mark, the VAS score between Group E and Group P was statistically significant (p-value 0.018) but not clinically relevant. The mean paracetamol and tramadol requirements were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Continuous ESPB is as effective as continuous PVB for postoperative analgesia in proximal femur surgeries. The enhanced safety profile of erector spinae block underscores its significance in postoperative pain management.