Bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block for Quality of Recovery Following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of Erector Spinae Plane Block on Postoperative Quality of Recovery in Patients Undergoing Transforaminal or Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) can has been used for analgesia after lumbar spine surgery. However, its effect on postoperative quality of recovery (QoR) remains underexplored in patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). This study hypothesized that ESPB would improve postoperative QoR in this patient cohort.

METHODS

Patients undergoing TLIF or OLIF were randomized into ESPB (n=38) and control groups (n=38). In the ESPB group, 25 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was injected into each erector spinae plane at the T12 level under ultrasound guidance before skin incision. Multimodal analgesia, including wound infiltration, was applied in both groups. The QoR-15 score was measured before surgery and 1 day (primary outcome) and 3 days after surgery. Postoperative pain at rest and during ambulation and postoperative ambulation were also evaluated for 3 days after surgery.

RESULTS

Perioperative QoR-15 scores were not significantly different between the ESPB and control groups including at 1 day after surgery (80±28 vs. 81±25, respectively; P=0.897). Patients in the ESPB group had a significantly lower mean (±SD) pain score during ambulation 1 hour after surgery (7±3 vs. 9±1, respectively; P=0.013) and significantly shorter median (interquartile range) time to the first ambulation after surgery (2.0 [1.0 to 5.5] h vs. 5.0 [1.8 to 10.0] h, respectively; P=0.038). There were no between-group differences in pain scores at other times or in the cumulative number of postoperative ambulations.

CONCLUSION

ESPB, as performed in this study, did not improve the QoR after TLIF or OLIF with multimodal analgesia.

The efficacy of lumbar erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia management in patients undergoing lumbar unilateral bi-portal endoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and reliability of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in posterior open lumbar spine surgery has been demonstrated; however, few randomized controlled trials of lumbar ESPB (L-ESPB) in lumbar unilateral bi-portal endoscopic (UBE) surgery have been reported.

METHODS

A total of 120 patients, aged 18 to 65 (who underwent elective lumbar UBE surgery under general anesthesia and exhibited an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I to III) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the ESPB group and the Control group. Ultrasound(US)-guided unilateral single-shot 0.25% ropivacaine L-ESPB was performed in the ESPB group, but not in the control group. Postoperative analgesic strategy for all patients: patient controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA, diluted and dosed with fentanyl alone) was initiated immediately after surgery combined with oral compound codeine phosphate and ibuprofen sustained release tablets (1 tablet containing ibuprofen 200 mg and codeine 13 mg, 1 tablet/q12h) commenced 6 h postoperatively. We collected and compared patient-centred correlates intraoperatively and 48 h postoperatively. The primary outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores.

RESULTS

Compared to the control group (n = 56), the ESPB group (n = 58) significantly reduced intraoperative remifentanil consumption (estimated median difference - 280 mcg, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 360 to - 200, p < 0.001, power = 100%); significantly reduced fentanyl consumption at 24 h postoperatively (estimated median difference - 80mcg, 95%[CI] - 128 to - 32, p = 0.001, power = 90%); and significantly enhanced the QoR-15 score at 24 h postoperatively (estimated median difference 11, 95%[CI] 8 to 14, p < 0.001, power = 100%). Compared to the control group, the ESPB group enhanced the resting numeric rating scale (NRS) score up to 8 h postoperatively, and the active movement NRS score up to 4 h postoperatively. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (p = 0.015, power = 70%), abdominal distension (p = 0.024, power = 64%), and muscular calf vein thrombosis (MCVT) (p = 0.033, power = 58%) was lower in the ESPB group than in the control group. Moreover, the occurrence of L-ESPB related adverse reactions was not found herein.

CONCLUSION

US-guided L-ESPB reduces intraoperative and 24 h postoperative opioid consumption and improves patients' QoR-15 scores at 24 h postoperatively. L-ESPB can be safely and effectively utilized in lumbar UBE surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2200061908 , date of registration: 10/07/2022. Registry URL.

Bilateral erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain relief in lumbar spine surgery: A PRISMA-compliant updated systematic review & meta-analysis

Study design

Systematic review.

Objective

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is growing in popularity over the recent past as an adjuvant modality in multimodal analgesic management following lumbar spine surgery (LSS). The current updated meta-analysis was performed to analyze the efficacy of ESPB for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing LSS.

Methods

We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library till June 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing the efficacy of bilateral ESPB for postoperative pain relief in lumbar spine surgeries. Post-operative pain scores, total analgesic consumption, first analgesic requirement time, length of stay and complications were the outcomes evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 17 software.

Results

32 RCTs including 1464 patients (ESPB/Control = 1077/1069) were included in the analysis. There was a significant pain relief in ESPB group, as compared to placebo across all timelines such as during immediate post-operative period (p < 0.001), 4 h (p < 0.001), 8 h (p < 0.001), 12 h (p < 0.001), 24 h (p = 0.001) post-surgery. Similarly, ESPB group showed a significant reduction in analgesic requirement at 8 h (p < 0.001), 12 h (p = 0.001), and 24 h (p < 0.001). However, no difference was noted in the first analgesic requirement time, time to ambulate or total length of stay in the hospital. ESPB demonstrated significantly improved overall satisfaction score for the analgesic management (p < 0.001), reduced intensive care stay (p < 0.05) with significantly reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting (p < 0.001) compared to controls.

Conclusion

ESPB offers prolonged post-operative pain relief compared to controls, thereby reducing the need for opioid consumption and its related complications.

Fascial plane blocks in children-Scientifically supported or not?

Since the introduction of Fascial Plane Blocks in 2007 there has been an enormous interest and application of Fascial Plane Blocks, evidenced by substantially more than 1000 PubMed items. Despite this gigantic number of publications, also including randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses in children, there is still no clear-cut insight into how much of the purported effect is in fact due to the blockade of nerve structures and how much is merely adding the well-known analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects of the plasma levels of local anesthetics that are achieved with these techniques. Furthermore, Fascial Plane Blocks appear useful only if compared to conventional multi-modal analgesia (no block or placebo) and Fascial Plane Blocks lack the potency to provide surgical anesthesia on their own and appear only to be of value when used for minor-moderate surgery. Despite the huge literature, there has so far not emerged any clinical situations where Fascial Plane Blocks have definitively been shown to be the block of choice, being decisively more effective than other established regional blocks. Lastly, Fascial Plane Blocks may appear as virtually free of complications, but case reports are emerging that point to a real risk for causing local anesthetic systemic toxicity when using Fascial Plane Blocks. This text aims to synthesize the current knowledge base regarding the Fascial Plane Blocks that are relevant to use in the pediatric context. In summary, there does currently not exist any convincing scientific evidence for the continued support for the use of Fascial Plane Blocks in children, except for the rectus sheath block and possibly also the transmuscular quadratus lumborum block.

General anesthesia combined with bilateral 2-level erector spinae plane block may accelerate postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery and rehabilitation process in patients undergoing posterior lumbar surgery: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This randomized controlled trial explored whether bilateral 2-level erector spinae plane block could accelerate postoperative gastrointestinal function and rehabilitation in patients undergoing posterior lumbar surgery.

METHODS

A total of 80 adult patients undergoing posterior lumbar surgery between March 2021 and August 2021 were randomized to either ultrasound-guided bilateral 2-level erector spinae plane block (group E) or not (group C). General anesthesia was routinely performed. The primary outcome was the time of the first flatus after surgery. We also recorded the first food and liquid intake, first off-bed activity, days of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Postoperative visual analog scale score and opioid consumption were also recorded. A venous blood sample was taken to measure the serum concentration of lipopolysaccharides, c-reactive protein, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-6, and blood glucose before induction of anesthesia, immediately after, and 24 and 48 hours after surgery.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients, 39 in group C and 38 in group E, finished the trial. Patients in group E had a significantly shorter time to first flatus (16.2 ± 3.2 vs 19.7 ± 3.0 hours, P < .05), earlier liquid intake (1.7 ± 0.2 vs 1.9 ± 0.3 hours, P < .05), earlier food intake (1.9 ± 0.2 vs 2.1 ± 0.3 hours, P < .05), and first off-bed activity (27.9 ± 3.2 vs 31.4 ± 3.3 h, P < .05). Patients in group E had shorter postoperative hospital stay (4.6 [4.2-5.5] d vs 5.4 [4.5-6.3], P < .05). We found that patients in group E had less pain and total sufentanil consumption (129 [120-133] vs 138 [132-147] μg, P < .05) within 24 hours after surgery. At 24 hours after surgery, the serum concentrations of lipopolysaccharides, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-6, and C-reactive protein in group E were significantly decreased compared to group C (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Bilateral 2-level erector spinae plane block can accelerate gastrointestinal function recovery and shorten the length of hospital stay in patients undergoing open posterior lumbar surgery. The potential mechanism may attribute to the opioids-sparing effects and anti-stress-related anti-inflammatory effects of bilateral 2-level erector spinae plane block.

Comparison of the feasibility and validity of a one-level and a two-level erector spinae plane block combined with general anesthesia for patients undergoing lumbar surgery

Background

Spinal surgery causes severe postoperative pain. An erector spinae plane (ESP) block can relieve postoperative pain, but the optimal blocking method has not been defined. The aim of this study is to compare the feasibility of a one-level and a two-level lumbar ESP block and their effect on intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in lumbar spinal surgery.

Methods

A total of 83 adult patients who were scheduled for posterior lumbar interbody fusion were randomly divided into two groups. Patients in Group I (n = 42) received an ultrasound-guided bilateral one-level ESP block with 0.3% ropivacaine, while patients in Group II (n = 41) received a bilateral two-level ESP block. Blocking effectiveness was evaluated, including whether a sensory block covered the surgical incision, sensory decrease in anterior thigh, and quadriceps strength decrease. Intraoperative anesthetic dosage, postoperative visual analogue scale scores of pain, opioid consumption, rescue analgesia, and opioid-related side effects were analyzed.

Results

Of the total number, 80 patients completed the clinical trial and were included in the analysis, with 40 in each group. The time to complete the ESP block was significantly longer in Group II than in Group I (16.0 [14.3, 17.0] min vs. 9.0 [8.3, 9.0] min, P = 0.000). The rate of the sensory block covering the surgical incision at 30 min was significantly higher in Group II than in Group I (100% [40/40] vs. 85.0% [34/40], P = 0.026). The rate of the sensory block in the anterior thigh was higher in Group II (43.8% [35/80] vs. 27.5% [22/80], P = 0.032), but the rate of quadriceps strength decrease did not differ significantly between the groups. The mean effect-site remifentanil concentration during intervertebral decompression was lower in Group II than in Group I (2.9 ± 0.3 ng/ml vs. 3.3 ± 0.5 ng/ml, P = 0.007).There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative analgesic consumption, postoperative analgesic consumption, and postoperative VAS pain scores at rest and with movement within 24 h. There were no block failures, block-related complications, and postoperative infection.

Conclusions

Among patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion, the two-level ESP block provided a higher rate of coverage of the surgical incision by the sensory block when compared with the one-level method, without increasing the incidence of procedure-related complications.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2100043596.