Safe and Effective Use of Bilateral Erector Spinae Block in Patient Suffering from Post-Operative Coagulopathy Following Hepatectomy

A Comparative Analysis of Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Conscious Sedation in Managing Percutaneous Cholecystostomy Pain

PURPOSE

This study investigates the efficacy of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) for managing perioperative and postoperative pain in patients undergoing percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) for acute cholecystitis, particularly in high-risk elderly patients with extensive comorbidities and limited functional status.

METHODS

In a retrospective single-center study, 58 high-risk patients scheduled for PC were assessed. ESPB was administered to 23 patients, while 22 received conscious sedation. Pain intensity was measured using the numeric rating scale before any analgesic or ESPB administration, during the procedure and at 1 and 12 h post-procedure and secondary outcomes included adverse effects and additional analgesic requirements.

RESULTS

The ESPB group experienced significant pain reduction during and post-procedure compared to the conscious sedation group (p = 0.002). Procedure times were shorter (p = 0.015), and postoperative tramadol was less frequently needed in the ESPB group (p = 0.007). The incidence of nausea was also lower in the ESPB group (p = 0.001). No ESPB-related complications were reported.

CONCLUSION

ESPB significantly alleviates perioperative and postoperative pain in PC patients, reducing additional analgesic use and side effects. It holds promise as a key component of pain management for high-risk surgical patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3, Non-randomized controlled cohort/follow-up study.

Analgesia for rib fractures: a narrative review

PURPOSE

Rib fracture(s) is a common and painful injury often associated with significant morbidity (e.g., respiratory complications) and high mortality rates, especially in the elderly. Risk stratification and prompt implementation of analgesic pathways using a multimodal analgesia approach comprise a primary endpoint of care to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with rib fractures. This narrative review aims to describe the most recent evidence and care pathways currently available, including risk stratification tools and pharmacologic and regional analgesic blocks frequently used as part of the broadly recommended multimodal analgesic approach.

SOURCE

Available literature was searched using PubMed and Embase databases for each topic addressed herein and reviewed by content experts.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Four risk stratification tools were identified, with the Study of the Management of Blunt Chest Wall Trauma score as most predictive. Current evidence on pharmacologic (i.e., acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gabapentinoids, ketamine, lidocaine, and dexmedetomidine) and regional analgesia (i.e., thoracic epidural analgesia, thoracic paravertebral block, erector spinae plane block, and serratus anterior plane block) techniques was reviewed, as was the pathophysiology of rib fracture(s) and its associated complications, including the development of chronic pain and disabilities.

CONCLUSION

Rib fracture(s) continues to be a serious diagnosis, with high rates of mortality, development of chronic pain, and disability. A multidisciplinary approach to management, combined with appropriate analgesia and adherence to care bundles/protocols, has been shown to decrease morbidity and mortality. Most of the risk-stratifying care pathways identified perform poorly in predicting mortality and complications after rib fracture(s).

Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

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.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the analgesic effects and side effect profile of ESPB against no block, placebo block or other regional anaesthetic techniques.

SEARCH METHODS

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.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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.

MAIN RESULTS

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.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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.

Regional anesthesia for transplantation surgery - A White Paper Part 2: Abdominal transplantation surgery

Transplantation surgery continues to evolve and improve through advancements in transplant technique and technology. With the increased availability of ultrasound machines as well as the continued development of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols, regional anesthesia has become an essential component of providing analgesia and minimizing opioid use perioperatively. Many centers currently utilize peripheral and neuraxial blocks during transplantation surgery, but these techniques are far from standardized practices. The utilization of these procedures is often dependent on transplantation centers' historical methods and perioperative cultures. To date, no formal guidelines or recommendations exist which address the use of regional anesthesia in transplantation surgery. In response, the Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia (SATA) identified experts in both transplantation surgery and regional anesthesia to review available literature concerning these topics. The goal of this task force was to provide an overview of these publications to help guide transplantation anesthesiologists in utilizing regional anesthesia. The literature search encompassed most transplantation surgeries currently performed and the multitude of associated regional anesthetic techniques. Outcomes analyzed included analgesic effectiveness of the blocks, reduction in other analgesic modalities-particularly opioid use, improvement in patient hemodynamics, as well as associated complications. The findings summarized in this systemic review support the use of regional anesthesia for postoperative pain control after transplantation surgeries. Part 1 of the manuscript focused on regional anesthesia performed in thoracic transplantation surgeries, and part 2 in abdominal transplantations. Specifically, regional anesthesia in liver, kidney, pancreas, intestinal, and uterus transplants or applicable surgeries are discussed.

Erector spinae plane block for postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

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.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the analgesic effects and side effect profile of ESPB against no block, placebo block or other regional anaesthetic techniques.

SEARCH METHODS

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.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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.

MAIN RESULTS

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.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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.

Translational research updates in female health anesthesiology: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Females represent 49.6% of the global population and constitute a significant proportion of surgical patients and hospital admissions. Little is known about the bi-directional effects of sex and anesthetics or the impact of anesthetic interventions on long-term female health outcomes. Sex differences in pain pathways can influence pain experience and treatment effectiveness. The impact of anesthetic management on the recurrence of breast cancer is poorly understood, as are the long-term consequences of cardiovascular disease and safe and effective treatments in pregnancy. This review aims to outline recent advances in translational science in female health anesthesiology research and highlight critical research opportunities in pain, cancer outcomes, and cardiovascular disorders.

Methods

We searched PubMed and summarized relevant articles published in English between December 2021 and June 2022.

Key Content and Findings

Studies reveal sex differences in pain pathways and highlight the importance of sex as a biological variable in experimental designs and translational medicine. Sex differences have also been observed in side effects attributed to opioid analgesics. We summarize some of the neural circuits that might underlie these differences. In the perioperative setting, specific anesthetics are implicated in metastatic seeding potential and acute and chronic pain outcomes, suggesting the importance of anesthetic selection in comprehensive care during oncologic surgery. In the peridelivery setting, preeclampsia, a cardiovascular disorder of pregnancy, affects maternal outcomes; however, biomarkers can risk-stratify females at risk for preeclampsia and hold promise for identifying the risk of adverse neurological and other health outcomes.

Conclusions

Research that builds diagnostic and predictive tools in pain and cardiovascular disease will help anesthesiologists minimize sex-related risks and side effects associated with anesthetics and peri-hospital treatments. Sex-specific anesthesia care will improve outcomes, as will the provision of practical information to patients and clinicians about the effectiveness of therapies and behavioral interventions. However, more research studies and specific analytic plans are needed to continue addressing sex-based outcomes in anesthesiology.

Erector Spinae Plane Block as an Analgesic Intervention in Acute Rib Fractures: A Scoping Review

Introduction

Rib fractures are a common sequelae of chest trauma and are associated with significant morbidity. The erector spinae nerve block (ESB) has been proposed as an alternative first-line regional technique for rib fractures due to ease of administration and minimal complication profile. We aimed to investigate the current literature surrounding this topic with a focus on pain and respiratory outcomes.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was performed on the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Keywords of "erector spinae block" and "rib fractures" were used to form the search strategy. Papers published in English investigating ESB as an analgesic intervention for acute rib fracture were included. Exclusion criteria were operative rib fixation, or where the indication for ESB was not rib fracture.

Results

There were 37 studies which met the inclusion criteria for this scoping review. Of these, 31 studies reported on pain outcomes and demonstrated a 40% decrease in pain scores post administration within the first 24 hours. Respiratory parameters were reported in 8 studies where an increase in incentive spirometry was demonstrated. Respiratory complication was not consistently reported. ESB was associated with minimal complications; only 5 cases of haematoma and infection were (incidence 0.6%) reported, none of which required further intervention.

Discussion

Current literature surrounding ESB in rib fracture management provides a positive qualitative evaluation of efficacy and safety. Improvements in pain and respiratory parameters were almost universal. The notable outcome from this review was the improved safety profile of ESB. The ESB was not associated with complications requiring intervention even in the setting of anticoagulation and coagulopathy. There still remains a paucity of large cohort, prospective data. Moreover, no current studies reflect an improvement in respiratory complication rates compared to current techniques. Taken together, these areas should be the focus of any future research.

Hematoma After Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block With Catheter Placement: A Case Report

The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is described as a safe and effective alternative when epidural or paravertebral blocks are contraindicated by anticoagulation therapy. We present a case of subcutaneous hematoma after ESPB catheter placement. The patient received bilateral ESPB catheters for perioperative pain control. Postoperatively, the patient developed tenderness to palpation at the left catheter site. Physical examination revealed a well circumscribed, fluctuant mass that produced bloody material during incision and drainage. This case report describes hematoma as a potential complication of the ESPB. After the procedure, patients should be closely monitored for complications, including hematoma.

Is the Erector Spinae Plane Block Effective for More than Perioperative Pain? A Retrospective Analysis

Introduction: The thoracic Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) is an ultrasound-guided block that has gained popularity and is widely used in acute pain setups. However, data regarding its role in chronic and cancer-related pain are anecdotal. Material and Methods: The study is a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent ESPB. The cohort was divided into subgroups based on three determinants: etiology, pain type, and chronicity. Results: One hundred and ten patients were included, and genders were affected equally. The average age was 61.2 ± 16.1 years. The whole group had a statistically significant reduction in a numerical rating scale (NRS) (7.4 ± 1.4 vs. 5.0 ± 2.6, p-value > 0.001). NRS reduction for 45 patients (41%) exceeded 50% of the pre-procedural NRS. The mean follow-up was 7.9 ± 4.6 weeks. Baseline and post-procedure NRS were comparable between all subgroups. The post-procedural NRS was significantly lower than the pre-procedural score within each group. The proportion of patients with over 50% improvement in NRS was lower for those with symptom duration above 12 months (p-value = 0.02). Conclusions: Thoracic ESPB is a simple and safe technique. The results support the possible role of ESPB for chronic as well as cancer-related pain.

Comparison of Continuous Thoracic Epidural With Erector Spinae Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Adult Living Donor Hepatectomy

Background: Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is commonly used for pain management in donor hepatectomy. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a newer ultrasound-guided block described for the management of thoracic and abdominal pain. There is limited literature available comparing the two techniques. The objective of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of continuous ESPB to continuous TEA in donor hepatectomy.

Methodology: The randomized controlled trial (RCT) was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04151511). A total of 82 patients undergoing donor hepatectomy between January 2020 and December 2020 were recruited, of whom 41 received TEA and 41 received ESPB. Randomization was done by the sealed opaque envelope method.

Results: The mean visual analog scale (VAS) scores in donors who received TEA and ESPB in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) (2.7 + 0.9 vs. 2.4 + 0.5; P = 0.02) at one hour (2.7 + 0.9 vs. 2.2 + 0.6; P = 0.008), six hours (1.8 + 0.9 vs. 0.8 + 0.5; P < 0.001), 12 hours (0.9 + 0.7 vs. 0.2 + 0.7; P < 0.001), and 24 hours (0.48 + 0.5 vs. 0.08 + 0.3; P < 0.001) were significantly different. Mean opioid consumption was 3.38 ± 6.24 mg in the ESPB group and 10.75 ± 9.64 mg in the TEA group (P < 0.001). Mean lung volume (MLV) at 24 hours in the TEA group and ESPB group was 1543 ml and 1815 ml (P < 0.001). MLV was 2545 ml in the TEA group and 2820 ml in the ESPB group at 48 hours (P < 0.001). Mean nausea and vomiting score at six hours was 0.1 vs. 0.03 (P = 0.02).

Conclusion: ESPB improves pain control after donor hepatectomy with an enhanced safety profile and reduced opioid consumption.

Erector Spinae Block with Opioid Free Anesthesia in Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Hepatic Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Hepatic resection is a major abdominal surgery with challenging pain management. We aimed to investigate the effect of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with opioid free anesthesia (OFA) in cirrhotic patients scheduled for liver resection on perioperative pain management in terms of hemodynamic stability. Secondarily, we assessed time to first request for analgesia and perioperative fentanyl consumption, nausea and vomiting within 24 hours after surgery.

Methods

Forty patients were randomized to block group (n = 20): OFA with ESPB and conventional group (n = 20): conventional balanced anesthesia with opioids (OFA associated non-opioid drugs [dexmedetomidine, magnesium sulfate, xylocaine, and acetaminophen] and ESPB). Bilateral ESP block was done with ultrasound guidance at the level of thoracic vertebrae T 6–7, the local anesthetic dose was 20 mL Bupivacaine 0.25% with adjuvant dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) on each side. We monitored hemodynamic stability as the primary endpoint (heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, and cardiac output).

Results

Bilateral ESPB offered somatic and visceral analgesia for hepatic resection patients with no intraoperative fentanyl required. Postoperatively, the block group with dexmedetomidine adjuvant to the local anesthesia drugs showed delay in the first request for analgesia (p = 0.092) and decreased fentanyl requirement (p < 0.001), so no patient in the ESP group suffered from postoperative nausea and vomiting compared to 50% in the conventional group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Bilateral ESP block with OFA is an effective approach for intra- and postoperative analgesia in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection.

Erector spinae plane block: A narrative review with systematic analysis of the evidence pertaining to clinical indications and alternative truncal blocks

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This narrative review discusses the anatomy, mechanism of action, techniques, pharmacology, indications, complications and substitutes for erector spinae plane (ESP) blocks.

INTERVENTIONS

The Medline, Embase and Google Scholar databases (inception-last week of April 2020) were searched. For indications and alternative blocks, a systematic analysis of the available evidence was carried out. In order to highlight the best evidence available, only randomized trials with prospective registration, blinded assessment and sample size justification were retained for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

The collective body of anatomical studies suggests that ESP block may work through a combination of different mechanisms (e.g., local anesthetic spread to the thoracic paravertebral space, epidural space, and dorsal ramus). Compared to control, the available evidence suggests that ESP block results in decreased postoperative pain and opioid requirement for a wide array of thoracic and abdominal surgical interventions. Erector spinae plane blocks and thoracic paravertebral blocks seem to provide comparable benefits for thoracoscopic and breast cancer surgery when performed with a similar number of injections. Currently, ESP blocks should be favored over intercostal blocks since, at best, the latter provide similar analgesia to ESP blocks despite requiring multiple-level injections.

CONCLUSIONS

In recent years, ESP blocks have become the topic of considerable clinical interest. Future trials are required to investigate their optimal technique, dose of local anesthetic and perineural adjuvants. Moreover, additional investigation should compare ESP blocks with robust multimodal analgesic regimens as well as truncal blocks such as thoracic epidural block, midpoint transverse process to pleura block, PECS block, quadratus lumborum block, and transversus abdominis plane block.