Comparative Study Between Dexmedetomidine with Bupivacaine and Bupivacaine Alone in Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Pain Control of Posterior Lumbosacral Spine Fixation Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
As posterior lumbosacral spine fixation surgeries are common spine procedures done nowadays due to different causes and mostly accompanied with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain, so should find effective postoperative analgesia for these patients. This study aimed to observe analgesic effect of dexmedetomidine combined with bupivacaine versus bupivacaine alone for erector spinae plane block ESPB for postoperative pain control of posterior lumbosacral spine fixation surgeries.
Double-blind randomized controlled study including 90 patients who were randomly allocated into 3 groups (30 patients for each): Dexmedetomidine combined with bupivacaine (DB group), bupivacaine (B group), and saline (control) (S group). US-guided ESPB was performed preoperatively bilaterally in all patients of the 3 groups. All patients received intravenous patient-controlled postoperative analgesia with morphine and 1 gm intravenous paracetamol every 8 hours. Primary clinical outcomes were active (while mobilization) and passive (at rest) visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at first 24 hours measured every 2 hours, opioid consumption (number of PCA presses), and need for rescue analgesia. Other clinical outcomes included active and passive VAS pain score at second 24 hours, measured every 4 hours, opioid consumption, need for rescue analgesia, postoperative opioid side effects, and intraoperative dexmedetomidine side effects as bradycardia and hypotension.
Active and passive VAS pain scores, postoperative opioid consumption, need for rescue analgesia, and postoperative opioid side effects were significantly lower in DB group when compared to other groups (B and S groups). There were no additional intraoperative dexmedetomidine side effects as bradycardia and hypotension. The estimated effect-size r was -0.58 and Cohen's d was -1.46.
Addition of dexmedetomidine to bupivacaine 0.25% in ESPB for postoperative pain control in patients of posterior lumbosacral spine fixation surgeries resulted in lower active and passive VAS pain scores, decreased postoperative opioid consumption, need for rescue analgesia and postoperative opioid side effects without additional intraoperative dexmedetomidine side effects.
NCT05590234.
Abu El Hassan SHA
，Wahsh EA
，Mousa AM
，Ibrahim ARN
，Mohammed EL
... -
《Drug Design Development and Therapy》
Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain.
Acute and chronic postoperative pain are important healthcare problems, which can be treated with a combination of opioids and regional anaesthesia. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a new regional anaesthesia technique, which might be able to reduce opioid consumption and related side effects.
To compare the analgesic effects and side effect profile of ESPB against no block, placebo block or other regional anaesthetic techniques.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science on 4 January 2021 and updated the search on 3 January 2022.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating adults undergoing surgery with general anaesthesia were included. We included ESPB in comparison with no block, placebo blocks or other regional anaesthesia techniques irrespective of language, publication year, publication status or technique of regional anaesthesia used (ultrasound, landmarks or peripheral nerve stimulator). Quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs, cross-over trials and studies investigating co-interventions in either arm were excluded.
Two review authors independently assessed all trials for inclusion and exclusion criteria, and risk of bias (RoB), and extracted data. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and we used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for the primary outcomes. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain at rest at 24 hours and block-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain at rest (2, 48 hours) and during activity (2, 24 and 48 hours after surgery), chronic pain after three and six months, as well as cumulative oral morphine requirements at 2, 24 and 48 hours after surgery and rates of opioid-related side effects.
We identified 69 RCTs in the first search and included these in the systematic review. We included 64 RCTs (3973 participants) in the meta-analysis. The outcome postoperative pain was reported in 38 out of 64 studies; block-related adverse events were reported in 40 out of 64 studies. We assessed RoB as low in 44 (56%), some concerns in 24 (31%) and high in 10 (13%) of the study results. Overall, 57 studies reported one or both primary outcomes. Only one study reported results on chronic pain after surgery. In the updated literature search on 3 January 2022 we found 37 new studies and categorised these as awaiting classification. ESPB compared to no block There is probably a slight but not clinically relevant reduction in pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery in patients treated with ESPB compared to no block (visual analogue scale (VAS), 0 to 10 points) (mean difference (MD) -0.77 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to -0.46; 17 trials, 958 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events between the groups treated with ESPB and those receiving no block (no events in 18 trials reported, 1045 participants, low-certainty evidence). ESPB compared to placebo block ESPB probably has no effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to placebo block (MD -0.14 points, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.00; 8 trials, 499 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events between ESPB and placebo blocks (no events in 10 trials reported; 592 participants; low-certainty evidence). ESPB compared to other regional anaesthetic techniques Paravertebral block (PVB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to PVB (MD 0.23 points, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.52; 7 trials, 478 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is probably no difference in block-related adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.95; 7 trials, 522 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to TAPB (MD -0.16 points, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.14; 3 trials, 160 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.83; 4 trials, 202 participants; low-certainty evidence). Serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) The effect on postoperative pain could not be assessed because no studies reported this outcome. There may be no difference in block-related adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.59; 2 trials, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pectoralis plane block (PECSB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to PECSB (MD 0.24 points, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.58; 2 trials, 98 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect on block-related adverse events could not be assessed. Quadratus lumborum block (QLB) Only one study reported on each of the primary outcomes. Intercostal nerve block (ICNB) ESPB may not have any additional effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to ICNB, but this is uncertain (MD -0.33 points, 95% CI -3.02 to 2.35; 2 trials, 131 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in block-related adverse events, but this is uncertain (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.28; 3 trials, 181 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Epidural analgesia (EA) We are uncertain whether ESPB has an effect on postoperative pain intensity at rest 24 hours after surgery compared to EA (MD 1.20 points, 95% CI -2.52 to 4.93; 2 trials, 81 participants; very low-certainty evidence). A risk ratio for block-related adverse events was not estimable because only one study reported this outcome.
ESPB in addition to standard care probably does not improve postoperative pain intensity 24 hours after surgery compared to no block. The number of block-related adverse events following ESPB was low. Further research is required to study the possibility of extending the duration of analgesia. We identified 37 new studies in the updated search and there are three ongoing studies, suggesting possible changes to the effect estimates and the certainty of the evidence in the future.
Oostvogels L
，Weibel S
，Meißner M
，Kranke P
，Meyer-Frießem CH
，Pogatzki-Zahn E
，Schnabel A
... -
《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》
Comparison of the postoperative effects of the erector spinae plane block and local infiltration analgesia in patients operated with lumbotomy surgery incision: Randomized clinical study.
Our aim was to observe the effects of local infiltration analgesia (LIA) or erector spinae plane block (ESPB) methods, which we applied preemptively in patients who were scheduled for surgery with a lumbotomy surgical incision and on intraoperative remifentanil consumption, and to compare the postoperative numerical rating scale (NRS), morphine demand, consumption, and pain degrees.
Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists I to III patients aged 18 to 75 years who were due to be operated on with a lumbotomy surgical incision were included in the study. The present study was conducted via prospective, randomized controlled, double-blind trials. After the induction of standard anesthesia, LIA was applied to 30 patients and ESPB was applied to 30 patients preemptively. The dose of remifentanil consumed in the intraoperative period was measured, and the hemodynamic parameters were measured every 5 minutes. Morphine bolus treatment with the postoperative patient-controlled analgesia and rescue analgesia with paracetamol were planned for the patients. Postoperative morphine and additional analgesia consumption, NRS, hemodynamic parameters, and complications were recorded for 48 hours.
There was no difference between the groups in terms of demographic and hemodynamic data. The mean consumption of remifentanil was measured as 455 ± 165.23 µg in the intraoperative ESPB group and 296.67 ± 110.59 µg in the LIA group, and a statistical difference was observed (P = .001). In the postoperative follow-ups, the ESPB group drug consumption and NRS score averages were significantly lower at all times (P = .01; patient-controlled analgesia-morphine, 41.93 ± 14.47 mg vs 57.23 ± 15.5 mg and additional analgesic-paracetamol: 2.1 ± 1.06 vs 4.27 ± 1.14 g). The mean duration of additional analgesic intake of the groups was 10.6 ± 8.1 in the LIA group, while it was 19.33 ± 8.87 in the ESPB group, a significant difference. The patient satisfaction questionnaire was also significantly in favor of ESPB (P = .05).
In conclusion, it has been shown that the intraoperative LIA method is more effective in terms of remifentanil consumption and in controlling pain in operations performed with a flank incision, but the ESPB method provides longer and more effective pain control in postoperative follow-ups.
Hakimoğlu S
，Özdemir T
，Çömez MS
，Urfali S
，Yildirak E
，Görür S
，Turhanoğlu S
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
