The Analgesic Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Blocks in Patients Undergoing Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery for Lumbar Fracture

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.

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 of Bilateral Erector Spinae Block in Patients Undergoing Posterior Spine Fusion Surgeries: A Comparative Randomised Controlled Trial

Introduction During spine surgeries, various levels of tissue injury can result in varying hemodynamic responses and significant postoperative pain. Perioperative pain management is essential to controlling hemodynamic responses and postoperative pain management. Erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks can help alleviate this pain by blocking the dorsal rami of the spinal nerve. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of ESP by assessing the perioperative opioid requirement, hemodynamic parameters, and visual analogue score (VAS) during the postoperative period. Methods In this study, 56 patients underwent elective posterior spine fusion surgeries under conventional anaesthesia and were allocated into two groups: 28 patients were included in the conventional group (Group C) and 28 patients in the ESP group (Group E). Group C patients received 20 ml of 0.9% sodium chloride (NaCl) on each side, and Group E patients received 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone on each side under ultrasound sonography guidance. Postoperative pain was assessed using the VAS score. The hemodynamic parameters during the intraoperative period, the time for the first opioid analgesia requirement until 24 hours in the postoperative period, and the amount of cumulative opioid consumption during the perioperative period were observed. Results Postoperative VAS was lower in Group E (P < 0.001). There were significant differences in hemodynamic parameters: heart rate (P < 0.045), systolic blood pressure (P < 0.002), diastolic blood pressure (P < 0.003), and mean arterial pressure (P < 0.002) at the time of incision in Group E. Intraoperative opioid requirements at the time of incision (P < 0.036), 60th minutes (P < 0.023), 120th minutes (P < 0.023), and postoperative opioid requirements at the first hour (P < 0.001), sixth hour (P < 0.004), 14th hour (P < 0.025), 20th hour (P < 0.009), and 24th hour (P < 0.025) had lower opioid requirements in Group E than Group C. Conclusion ESP block is a more site-specific dorsal rami block with a better perioperative hemodynamic profile, a part of multimodal analgesia intraoperatively, and excellent postoperative analgesia with fewer postoperative opioid requirements in multilevel spine fusion surgeries.

Effectiveness of Erector Spinae Muscle Block in Vertebral Oncologic Fracture

Objectives An observational, retrospective, longitudinal, and analytical study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the erector spinae plane (ESP) block in managing pain in patients with vertebral fractures secondary to tumoral activity. This study included patients treated at the Pain Clinic who underwent ESP block. The objectives were to describe demographic characteristics, oncological diagnosis, vertebral fracture features, imaging techniques, medications used, and the level of ESP block. Additionally, pain levels were assessed using a numerical analog scale, and the consumption of opioid analgesic medications before and after the ESP block, during follow-up consultations, along with patient satisfaction. Methodology This retrospective, observational, and analytical study was conducted at the Pain Clinic of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico. Patients with vertebral fractures secondary to tumor activity were included, with data collected from March 2020 to September 2023. A consecutive non-probabilistic sampling method was employed, and specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for quantitative variables, with a significance level of p ≤ 0.05. IBM SPSS Statistics v. 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) software was utilized. Results A sample comprising 16 individuals was obtained, with an equal distribution between males and females. Fracture levels displayed variation, with L3 (12.5%) and T6 (12.5%) being the most prevalent. The ESP approach was primarily conducted using ultrasound (68.8%), while fluoroscopy and computed tomography were utilized in 25.0% and 6.3% of cases, respectively. Predominantly, methylprednisolone and ropivacaine (75.0%) were administered, with phenol used in 18.8% and a combination of methylprednisolone and bupivacaine in 6.3%. Patient satisfaction levels were reported at 81.3% (satisfied or very satisfied). Statistically significant disparities were noted between baseline and incidental pain reduction and oral opioid equivalent dosage in milligrams of morphine per day (MME/day) before and after ESP block (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusions This research provides promising preliminary evidence supporting the effectiveness of ESP block for pain management in vertebral fractures secondary to tumoral activity, enhancing the quality and safety of care for oncology patients. The absence of complications, significant improvement in pain, and reduction in opioid dependence underscore the clinical relevance of this therapeutic approach. An observational, retrospective, longitudinal, and analytical study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the ESP block in managing pain in patients with vertebral fractures secondary to tumoral activity. This study included patients treated at the Pain Clinic who underwent ESP block. The objectives were to describe demographic characteristics, oncological diagnosis, vertebral fracture features, imaging techniques, medications used, and the level of ESP block. Additionally, pain levels were assessed using a numerical analogue scale, and the consumption of opioid analgesic medications before and after the ESP block, during follow-up consultations, along with patient satisfaction.

Efficacy of erector spine plane block in two different approaches to lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a retrospective pilot study

Background

Erector spine plane block (ESPB) has been widely used in spinal surgery, although there are variable data about its efficacy.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ESPB in elective lumbar spinal fusion surgery patients with two different surgical approaches.

Materials and methods

Retrospectively, 45 elective lumbar transpedicular fusion (TPF) surgery patients undergoing open surgery with different approaches [posterior transforaminal fusion approach (TLIF) or combined posterior and anterior approach (TLIF+ALIF)] were divided into 2 groups: general anesthesia (GA, n = 24) and general anesthesia combined with ESPB (GA + ESPB, n = 21). The primary outcome was to analyze the efficacy of ESPB in two different surgical approaches in terms of pain intensity in the first 48 h. Secondary: Fentanyl-free patients and opioid consumption in the first 24 h postoperatively. Comparative analysis was performed (SPSS® v. 28.0) (p < 0.05).

Results

Out of 45 patients (27 female), 21 received GA + ESPB and 24 received GA. The average age was 60.3 ± 14.3 years. Chronic back pain before the operation was registered in 56% of patients. ESPB was performed in 17 TLIF and in 4 TLIF+ALIF patients. ESPB significantly reduced pain intensity at rest in both surgical approaches 48 h after surgery (p < 0.05). The need for postoperative fentanyl infusion was significantly lower in the group treated with GA + ESPB in both surgical approaches than in those who only received GA (29% vs. 77% in TLIF and 0% vs. 80% in TLIF+ALIF); p = 0.01 and p = 0.004. Additionally, we observed that ESPB provides a good analgesic effect for up to 6.8 ± 3.2 h in the TLIF and 8.9 ± 7.6 h in the TLIF+ALIF approaches. Consequently, ESPB reduced the initiation of the fentanyl compared to GA alone, with a mean difference of 3.2 ± 4.2 h in the TLIF subgroup (p = 0.045) and 6.7 ± 5.3 h in TLIF +ALIF (p = 0.028). Only in the TLIF+ALIF approach, ESPB reduced the total fentanyl consumption compared to those with GA (1.43 ± 0.45 mg/24 h vs. 0.93 ± 0.68 mg/24 h; p = 0.015).

Conclusion

ESPB significantly reduced pain at rest after surgery, the number of patients requiring immediate postoperative fentanyl analgesia, and total fentanyl consumption in both surgical approaches, particularly in TLIF+ALIF. However, the application of ESPB does not always provide completely sufficient analgesia.

Erector Spinae Plane Block on Postoperative Pain and Opioid Consumption After Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

Evaluate the effectiveness of the erector spinae plane (ESP) block in lumbar spine surgeries.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and other gray literature were searched for eligible studies. Risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), and standardized mean difference were used to estimate outcomes with suitable effect models. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Risk of Bias algorithm and the grades of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach.

FINDINGS

Twenty-two randomized controlled trials involving 1,327 patients were included. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block demonstrated a lower cumulative pain score within the first 48 hours at rest (MD, -1.03; 95% CI, -1.19 to -0.87; P < .00001) and during activity (MD, -1.16; 95% CI, -1.24 to -1.08; P < .00001). In addition, ESP block decreased opioid consumption (MD, -6.25; 95% CI, -8.33 to -4.17; P < .00001) and prolonged the time to first analgesic rescue (MD, 5.66; 95% CI, 3.11-8.20; P < .0001) resulting in fewer patients requesting rescue analgesic (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.83; P = .02), lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.10-0.79; P = .02) with improved patient satisfaction score (standardized mean difference, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.40-2.94; P < .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

ESP block can provide effective postoperative pain control for lumbar spine surgery, improve patient satisfaction, and reduce the amount of postoperative opioid use.

Efficacy and Safety of Bilateral Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted to assess efficacy and safety of bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) for postoperative analgesia in patients receiving spine surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched by 2 reviewers independently to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of ultrasound-guided ESPB for pain management in patients undergoing spine surgery. For meta-analysis, mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were selected for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI were selected for dichotomous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 25 randomized controlled trials including 1917 patients (873 in ESPB group and 874 in control group) were eligible for inclusion. At rest, ESPB was associated with significantly lower pain intensity at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours compared with the control group. During movement, ESPB was associated with significantly lower pain intensity at 0, 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours compared with the control group. Significantly reduced opioid consumption (MD = -6.29, 95% CI [-8.16, 4.41], P < 0.001), prolonged time for first rescue analgesia (MD = 7.51, 95% CI [3.47, 11.54], P < 0.001), fewer patients needing rescue analgesia (RR = 0.34, 95% CI [0.28, 0.43], P < 0.0001), improved patient satisfaction (MD = 1.34, 95% CI [0.88, 1.80], P < 0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (MD = -0.38, [95% CI -0.50, -0.26], P < 0.001) were demonstrated after use of ESPB. Additionally, ESPB was associated with decreased risks of any adverse event (RR = 0.51, 95% CI [0.43, 0.60], P < 0.001) and postoperative nausea and vomiting events (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.31, 0.49], P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided ESPB is an effective adjunctive technique with good tolerability for multimodal analgesia in management of pain in patients undergoing spine surgery.

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.

Regional analgesia techniques for lumbar spine surgery: a frequentist network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Various regional analgesia techniques are used to reduce postoperative pain in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. Traditionally, wound infiltration (WI) with local anesthetics has been widely used by surgeons. Recently, other regional analgesia techniques, such as the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block, are being used for multimodal analgesia. The authors aimed to determine the relative efficacy of these using a network meta-analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Library, and Google Scholar databases to identify all randomized controlled trials that compared the analgesic efficacy of the following interventions: ESPB, TLIP block, WI technique, and controls. The primary endpoint was postoperative opioid consumption during the first 24 hours after surgery, while the pain score, estimated postoperatively at three different time periods, was the secondary objective.

RESULTS

The authors included 34 randomized controlled trials with data from 2365 patients. TLIP showed the greatest reduction in opioid consumption compared to controls [mean difference (MD) =-15.0 mg; 95% CI: -18.8 to -11.2]. In pain scores, TLIP had the greatest effect during all time periods compared to controls (MD=-1.9 in early, -1.4 in middle, -0.9 in late). The injection level of ESPB was different in each study. When only surgical site injection of ESPB was included in the network meta-analysis, there was no difference compared with TLIP (MD=1.0 mg; 95% CI: -3.6 to 5.6).

CONCLUSIONS

TLIP showed the greatest analgesic efficacy after lumbar spine surgery, in terms of postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores, while ESPB and WI are also alternative analgesic options for these surgeries. However, further studies are needed to determine the optimal method of providing regional analgesia after lumbar spine surgery.

Erector spinae plane block for perioperative pain management in neurosurgical lower-thoracic and lumbar spinal fusion: a single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Erector spinae plane block is a locoregional anaesthetic technique widely used in several different surgeries due to its safety and efficacy. The aim of this study is to assess its utility in spinal degenerative and traumatic surgery in western countries and for patients of Caucasian ethnicity.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective lower-thoracic and lumbar spinal fusion were randomised into two groups: the case group (n = 15) who received erector spinae plane block (ropivacaine 0.4% + dexamethasone 4 mg, 20 mL per side at the level of surgery) plus postoperative opioid analgesia, and the control group (n = 15) who received opioid-based analgesia.

RESULTS

The erector spinae plane block group showed significantly lower morphine consumption at 48 h postoperatively, lower need for intraoperative fentanyl (203.3 ± 121.7 micrograms vs. 322.0 ± 148.2 micrograms, p-value = 0.021), lower NRS score at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 36 h, and higher satisfaction rates of patients (8.4 ± 1.2 vs. 6.0 ± 1.05, p-value < 0.0001). No differences in the duration of the hospitalisation were observed. No erector spinae plane block-related complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Erector spinae plane block is a safe and efficient opioid-sparing technique for postoperative pain control after spinal fusion surgery. This study recommends its implementation in everyday practice and incorporation as a part of multimodal analgesia protocols.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was approved by the local ethical committee of Romagna (CEROM) and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04729049). It also adheres to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and the CONSORT 2010 guidelines.

Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for postoperative short-term outcomes in lumbar spine surgery: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery usually suffer from moderate to severe acute pain. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has been applied to relieve acute pain in various surgeries and improve postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to further identify the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. This study also evaluates the outcomes of the erector spinae plane block compared with other regional blocks.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Embase, and CINAHL databases to identify all randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of ESPB on postoperative pain after lumbar spine surgery. The primary outcome is postoperative total opioid consumption in 24 hours. The secondary outcomes are postoperative pain scores, intraoperative opioid consumption, time to first rescue analgesia, number of patients requiring rescue analgesia, first time to ambulation after surgery, length of hospital stay, patients' satisfaction score, and postoperative side effects such as postoperative nausea and vomiting, itching.

RESULTS

A total of 19 randomized controlled trials are included in the final analysis. Compared with no/sham block, ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block can decrease perioperative opioid consumption including intraoperative opioid consumption: standardized mean difference (SMD) = -3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-3.99, -2.09), P < .01, and opioid consumption postoperatively: (SMD = -2.80, 95% CI [-3.61, -2.00], P < .01); reduce postoperative pain at 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours both at rest and movement; meanwhile shorten time to hospital length of stay: (SMD = -1.01, 95% CI [-1.72, 0.30], P = .006), decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR = 0.35, 95% CI [0.27, 0.46], P < .00001), and improve patient satisfaction (SMD = -2.03, 95% CI [-0.96, 3.11], P = .0002). But ultrasound-guided ESPB doesn't shorten the time to ambulation after surgery (SMD = -0.56, 95% CI [-1.21, 0.08], P = .09). Additionally, ESPB is not superior to other regional blocks (e.g., thoracolumbar interfascial plane/midtransverse process to pleura block).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates that ultrasound-guided ESPB can provide effective postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and improve postoperative outcomes, and it deserves to be recommended as an analgesic adjunct in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgeries.

Efficacy and Safety of Erector Spinae Plane Block for Perioperative Pain Management in Lumbar Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Since the application of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in 2016, the approach has been gradually applied to perioperative analgesia in various surgeries. In recent years, more and more studies have focused on the effect of ESPB in perioperative analgesia of lumbar spinal surgery, but its clinical effect remains controversial.

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis was designed to explore the efficacy and safety of ESPB used for perioperative pain management in lumbar spinal surgery.

Methods

The Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were comprehensively searched for relevant articles from inception to March 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ESPB with placebo or without ESPB in lumbar spinal surgery were included. The Review Manager 5.3 software was employed for this meta-analysis.

Results

Nineteen RCTs with 1381 participants were included for final analysis. ESPB group exhibited lower intraoperative consumption of sufentanil and remifentanil, lower total opioid consumption within 24 h and 48 h after surgery, lower incidence of rescue analgesia, longer time to first rescue analgesic and lower number of PCA button presses compared to the control group (P<0.05). Moreover, the ESPB group had significantly lower pain scores at rest and on movement within 48 h after surgery compared with the control group (P<0.05). In terms of opioid-related adverse reactions, ESPB reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea, vomitting, somnolence and itching in comparison to the control group (P<0.05). ESPB-related serious complications were not reported in included studies.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrated that ESPB used in lumbar spinal surgery was effective in relieving postoperative pain, decreasing the perioperative consumption of opioids, as well as decreasing the incidence of postoperative opioid-related adverse reactions.

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.

Ultrasound-guided fascial plane blocks for spine surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development of truncal and fascial plane blocks has created novel opportunities to apply regional analgesic techniques to patients undergoing spine surgery. This review will summarize recent literature devoted to evaluating candidate blocks for spine surgery, including erector spinae plane block, thoracolumbar interfascial plane block, midpoint transverse process to pleura block, and transversus abdominis plane block. Procedure-specific effects of blocks on patient and healthcare system outcomes will be presented and gaps in care and knowledge will be highlighted.

RECENT FINDINGS

The most studied paradigm was bilateral erector spinae plane block for lumbar spine surgery. The most common outcomes assessed were early postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption and related side effects, and length of hospital stay. All candidate blocks were associated with mixed evidence for analgesic and opioid-sparing benefits, and/or reductions in length of hospital stay. The magnitude of these effects was overall small, with many studies showing statistically but not clinically significant differences on outcomes of interest. This may reflect, at least in part, the current state of the (emerging) evidence base on this topic.

SUMMARY

Our understanding of the risks, benefits, and value of truncal and fascial plane blocks for spine surgery cohorts is evolving. Although the results derived from this body of literature are encouraging, further research is required before the widespread adoption of specified blocks into spine care can be recommended.

Efficacy of Postoperative Analgesia by Erector Spinal Plane Block after Lumbar Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background. In recent years, erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has been increasingly used as a new regional block technique for postoperative analgesia; however, little is known on its benefits. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of ESPB in lumbar spine surgery. Methods. Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ESPB with no block in lumbar spine surgery until September 30, 2021. The primary outcome was opioid consumption after surgery. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias was used to evaluate the quality of included studies. Results. Fifteen RCTs involving 980 patients were included in the study. Opioid consumption 24 hours after surgery was significantly lower in the ESPB group standardized mean difference ( $\text{SMD}=-2.27$ , 95% confidence interval (95% CI) (-3.21, -1.32); $p<0.01$ ). ESPB reduced pain scores at rest and on movement within 48 hours after surgery and the incidence of the postoperative rescue analgesia ( $\text{RR}=0.32$ , 95% CI (0.31, 0.80); $p=0.02$ ), while it significantly prolonged time to first rescue analgesia ( $\text{SMD}=4.87$ , 95% CI (2.84, 6.90); $p<0.01$ ). Moreover, significantly better patient satisfaction was associated with ESPB ( $\text{SMD}=1.89$ , 95% CI (1.03, 2.74); $p<0.01$ ). Conclusion. EPSB provides effective and safe postoperative analgesia after lumbar spine surgery.

Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block in Thoracolumbar Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Neurosurgical spinal surgeries such as micro- discectomy and complex fusion surgeries remain the leading causes of disability-adjusted life-year. Major spinal surgeries often result in severe postprocedural pain due to massive dissection of the underlying tissues. While opioids offer effective pain control, they frequently lead to side effects, such as post-operative nausea and vomiting, pruritus, constipation, and respiratory depression. ESPB was successfully used in spinal surgery as a component of a multimodal analgesic regimen and it eliminated the requirements for opioids. The primary purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare post-operative opioid consumption between ESPB and placebo.

Methods

To conduct this systematic review, we used the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)” guidelines. We conducted a search for relevant articles available in the following databases: Google Scholar, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library published up to March 2022.

Results

The total morphine consumption within 24 h after surgery was lower in the ESPB group, the mean difference (in mg of morphine) with 95% CI is −9.27 (−11.63, −6.91). The pain intensity (0–10) at rest measured 24 h after surgery was lower in the ESPB group, the MD with 95% CI is −0.47 (−0.77, −0.17). The pain intensity during movement measured 24 h after surgery was lower in the ESPB group, the MD with 95% CI is −0.73 (−1.00, −0.47). Post-operative nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the ESPB group, the risk ratio with 95% CI is 0.32 (0.19, 0.53).

Conclusion

Ultrasound-guided ESPB was superior to placebo in reducing post-operative opioid consumption, pain intensity, post-operative nausea and vomiting, and prolonging the time to first rescue analgesia. There were no ESPB-related serious complications reported.

Efficacy of Erector Spinae Nerve Block for Pain Control After Spinal Surgeries: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB), as a regional anesthesia modality, is gaining interest and has been used in abdominal, thoracic and breast surgeries. The evidence on the efficacy of this block in spinal surgeries is equivocal. Recently published reviews on this issue have concerning limitations in methodology.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were done in patients undergoing spinal surgery and had compared outcomes of interest among those that received ESPB and those with no block/placebo were considered for inclusion. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA software. GRADE assessment was done for the quality of pooled evidence.

Results

A total of 13 studies were included. Patients receiving ESPB had significantly reduced total opioid use (Standardized mean difference, SMD −2.76, 95% CI: −3.69, −1.82), need for rescue analgesia (Relative risk, RR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.66) and amount of rescue analgesia (SMD −5.08, 95% CI: −7.95, −2.21). Patients receiving ESPB reported comparatively lesser pain score at 1 h (WMD −1.62, 95% CI: −2.55, −0.69), 6 h (WMD −1.10, 95% CI: −1.45, −0.75), 12 h (WMD −0.78, 95% CI: −1.23, −0.32) and 24 h (WMD −0.54, 95% CI: −0.83, −0.25) post-operatively. The risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (RR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19, 0.54) was lower in those receiving ESPB. There were no differences in the duration of surgery, intra-operative blood loss and length of hospital stay between the two groups. The quality of pooled findings was judged to be low to moderate.

Conclusions

ESPB may be effective in patients with spinal surgery in reducing post-operative pain as well as need for rescue analgesic and total opioid use. In view of the low to moderate quality of evidence, more trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Systematic Review Registration:http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42021278133.

Erector spinae plane block for spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although the erector spinae plane block has been used in various truncal surgical procedures, its clinical benefits in patients undergoing spinal surgery remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical benefits of erector spinae plane block in patients undergoing spinal surgery.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for randomized controlled trials comparing the erector spinae plane block with a nonblocked control for spinal surgery.

Results

Twelve studies encompassing 696 subjects were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. We found that the erector spinae plane block decreased postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption in the postoperative and intraoperative periods. Moreover, it prolonged the time to the first rescue analgesic, reduced the number of patients who required rescue analgesia, and lowered the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, it did not exhibit efficacy in decreasing the incidence of urinary retention and itching or shortening the length of hospital stays, or the time to first ambulation.

Conclusions

Erector spinae plane block improves analgesic efficacy among patients undergoing spinal surgery compared with nonblocked controls; however, there is insufficient evidence regarding the benefits of erector spinae plane block for rapid recovery.