Erector Spinae Plane Block Combined with Serratus Anterior Plane Block Versus Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Postoperative Analgesia and Recovery After Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Non-inferiority Clinical Trial

Continuous serratus anterior block for sternotomy analgesia after cardiac surgery: a single-centre feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Moderate-to-severe pain is common after cardiac surgery, peaking during the first and second postoperative days. Several nerve blocks for sternotomy have been described; however, the optimal location for continuous catheters has not been established. This study assessed the feasibility of a larger trial evaluating the efficacy of serratus anterior plane (SAP) catheter analgesia for sternotomy pain.

METHODS

This double-blinded trial included patients undergoing cardiac surgery via sternotomy. Bilateral SAP catheters were placed in all participants, and randomised to ropivacaine or placebo. We assessed feasibility based on predetermined endpoints: (1) average recruitment rate >4 per month; (2) protocol adherence rate >90%; (3) primary outcome measurement rate >90%; and (4) significant catheter-related adverse event rate ≤2%. The quality of recovery index (QoR-15) was compared using an independent t-test.

RESULTS

Of 52 participants randomised, feasibility data were available for 50. A definitive study was deemed 'not feasible' in our standalone centre owing to a low recruitment rate (2.4 per month) and a high adverse event rate (pneumothorax rate 12%). There were no major protocol deviations but minor deviations in 12% of participants. Pain, opioid consumption, complications, and quality of recovery were not different between groups. Long-term pain at 3 months was low in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A single-centre trial was deemed not feasible for our setting. With limited data, the quality of recovery was not different with ropivacaine dosing of bilateral SAP catheters for sternotomy pain.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04648774.

Assessment of intercostal nerve block analgesia and local anesthetic infiltration for thoracoscopic pulmonary bullae resection: a comparative study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the analgesic effects of intercostal nerve block (ICNB) and local anesthetic infiltration (LAI) on postoperative pain and recovery following thoracoscopic resection of pulmonary bullae.

METHODS

A total of 160 patients undergoing thoracoscopic pulmonary bullae resection were randomly assigned to receive either ICNB (n = 80) or LAI (n = 80). An experienced anesthesiologist administered ultrasound guided ICNB at the T4 and T7 levels with 5 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine hydrochloride for the ICNB group. Instead, the LAI group received 10 mL of the same concentration of ropivacaine hydrochloride at the same concentration used for ICNB for infiltration anesthesia at the incision sites. Out of the initial cohort, 146 patients completed the study (ICNB group, n = 71; LAI group, n = 75). The collected data included preoperative clinical characteristics, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain at various time points post-surgery (6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h). Additionally, the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire was administered 24 h after surgery, and sleep quality was evaluated using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI).

RESULTS

No significant differences were found in drainage volume, use of additional analgesics, duration of chest tube placement, or hospital stay between the two groups. However, the ICNB group had significantly lower VAS scores and QoR-15 scores 24 h postoperatively (p < 0.05), indicating better pain management and recovery. The ICNB group also reported better sleep quality, as reflected by lower PSQI scores.

CONCLUSION

ICNB provides superior analgesia compared to LAI after thoracoscopic resection of pulmonary bullae, significantly improving postoperative recovery.

The Efficacy of Continuous Serratus Anterior and Erector Spinae Plane Blocks vs Intercostal Nerve Block in Uniportal-Vats Surgery: A Propensity-Matched Prospective Trial

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of continuous erector spinae plane block(c-ESPB) and serratus anterior plane block(c-SAPB) versus the intercostal nerve block (ICNB) in Uniportal-VATS in terms of pain control, drug consumption, and complications.

METHODS

Ninety-three consecutive patients, undergone one of the three peripheral nerve blocks after Uniportal-VATS, were prospectively enrolled. A 1:1 propensity score matching was used to minimize bias.

RESULTS

C-ESPB and c-SAPB groups had no difference in morphine request upon awakening compared to ICNB. A higher VAS-score was recorded in c-ESPB compared to ICNB in the first 12 h after surgery. A significantly lower consumption of paracetamol in II postoperative day (p.o.d.) and tramadol in I and II p.o.d. was recorded in the c-ESPB group compared to the ICNB group. A higher dynamic VAS score was recorded at 24 h and 48 h in the ICNB group compared to the c-SAPB. No difference was found in safety, VAS-score and drug consumption between c-ESPB and c-SAPB at any given time, except for a higher tramadol request in c-SAPB in II p.o.d.

CONCLUSIONS

C-ESPB and c-SAPB appear to have the same safety and analgesic efficacy when compared between them and to ICNB in Uniportal-VATS approach. C-ESPB showed a delayed onset of analgesic effect and a lower postoperative drug consumption compared to ICNB.

Analgesic efficacy and safety of erector spinae versus serratus anterior plane block in thoracic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) are regional anesthesia techniques that have shown favorable results in pain management following thoracic surgeries; however, their relative superiority is unclear. This review (PROSPERO: CRD42023443018) aims to compare the analgesic efficacy of ESPB and SAPB in patients undergoing thoracic surgeries through the pooled analysis of co-primary outcomes: postoperative oral-morphine-equivalent (mg) consumption in 24 h and pain scores (static) at 24 h.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to May 2023, comparing ESPB and SAPB in thoracic surgeries. Statistical pooling was done using Review Manager 5.4.1. Bias assessment employed the Cochrane Collaboration Risk-of-Bias 2.0 tool. The strength of evidence was assessed using the guidelines from the GRADE working group.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs (485 patients) were included in the study. Postoperative pain scores (static) at 24 h (mean difference (MD) =  - 0.31 [- 0.57, 0.05], p = 0.02) and postoperative oral-morphine-equivalent (mg) consumption in 24 h (MD =  - 19.73 [- 25.65, - 13.80], p < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the ESBP group. However, the MDs did not exceed the set threshold for clinical importance. No significant differences were observed in the opioid-related adverse effects and block-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Our statistically significant results imply that ESPB has superior analgesic efficacy compared to SAPB; however, this difference is clinically unimportant. The safety profile of the two blocks is comparable; hence, current evidence cannot define the relative superiority of one block over the other. Our findings warrant further research with standardized methodologies and a longer duration of analgesic efficacy assessment to yield robust evidence for better clinical applications.