Comparison of erector spinae plane block and local anaesthetic infiltration of the incision site for postoperative analgesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy - A randomised parallel-group study

Comparison of the Efficacy Between Ultrasound-Guided Paravertebral Block and Erector Spinae Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Using Levobupivacaine: A Prospective and Randomized Study

Introduction Various techniques have been developed in the current era of regional anesthesia practice. With the advent of ultrasound, the visualization of needle and pleura in real time enables a better outcome with negligible adverse events. This study was designed to compare the efficacy between ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and paravertebral block (PVB) in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the duration of postoperative analgesia with levobupivacaine, a local anesthetic with higher lipid solubility, making it more potent and resulting in a longer duration of action. Methods This prospective randomized single-blinded study enrolled 50 patients of ASA grades I and II, aged between 20 and 60 years, who were scheduled for PCNL under general anesthesia. Patients were divided into two groups of 25 each: group ESPB and group PVB, and 25 mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine was administered to both groups. They were primarily evaluated for the duration of postoperative analgesia. Total rescue analgesic requirements, hemodynamic parameters, and any adverse effects were also assessed. Results Both ESPB and PVB provided a significant duration of analgesia postoperatively. Demographic characteristics in both groups were comparable. The duration of postoperative analgesia in group ESPB was 746 ± 58.6 minutes when compared to group PVB, which is 768 ± 68.6 minutes (p = 0.08). Intravenous (IV) paracetamol was used as a rescue analgesic. The doses used were also comparable in both groups, with the visual analog score (VAS) being high after around 12 hours of surgery. The total rescue analgesic requirement was similar in both groups (group ESPB, 2.0 ± 1.6; group PVB, 2.2 ± 1.4; p = 0.51). There were no significant hemodynamic or other adverse effects in either group. Conclusion We conclude that both ESPB and PVB using isobaric levobupivacaine 0.25% as a local anesthetic are equally efficacious in providing effective postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing PCNL under general anesthesia.

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.

Current advances in pain regimens for percutaneous nephrolithotomy A comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) causes pain and discomfort after surgery. The primary causes of immediate postoperative pain after PCNL are visceral pain from the ureters and kidneys, and body surface discomfort from incisions. Acute, untreated pain has the potential to develop into chronic pain, which remains a considerable burden for the rehabilitation of patients. The goal of this review was to describe the current options for treating pain post-PCNL.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review of all published manuscripts on pain protocols for patients undergoing PCNL and related topics; 50 published manuscripts were identified and reviewed.

RESULTS

PCNL morbidity must be reduced by an appropriate management of postoperative pain. Opioids, multimodal therapy, tubeless PCNL, reduced size of nephrostomy tube, and regional anesthesia are currently available for reducing postoperative pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing successful treatment strategies for postoperative pain after PCNL is key in reducing the morbidity and mortality of PCNL.

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.

Erector spinae plane blocks for analgesia after percutaneous nephrolithotomy A pathway to reduce opioids

INTRODUCTION

Despite its minimally invasive nature, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL ) may be associated with significant pain. Challenges in pain control may prevent timely discharge (and expose patients to adverse effects of opioid use). We sought to evaluate whether our patients who underwent erector spinae plane (ESP) regional blocks experienced improved postoperative pain control and decreased opioid use after PCNL (compared with those who did not receive blocks).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive PCNL cases on patients admitted for greater than 24 hours without pre-existing opioid regimens for chronic pain. Cases were completed by a single high-volume surgeon. Patients who accepted an ESP block were compared to those who did not receive a block. Patients received either a single injection or a disposable pump delivering intermittent boluses of ropivacaine 0.2%. Demographic and perioperative data were analyzed. The primary outcomes were opioid use measured in morphine milligram equivalent (MME ) and patient-reported pain scores during the first 24 hours of hospitalization.

RESULTS

From March 2019 to August 2021, 44 patients were identified who met criteria - 28 of whom received an ESP block (including 14 continuous blocks). The patients who received blocks had significantly decreased opioid use (18.3 vs. 81.3 MME, p=0.004) and a longer mean time to first non-zero pain score (p=0.004). Continuous blocks had similar opioid use to single shot blocks (21.0 vs. 15.6 MME, p=0.952).

CONCLUSIONS

ESP regional blocks appear to offer an effective adjunct method for pain control after PCNL and may reduce post-PCNL opioid use while maintaining adequate patient analgesia.

The safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block in postoperative analgesic of PCNL: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The patients received percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with severe postoperative pain and discomfort. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB), as a new anesthesia method of plane block, has a positive effect on postoperative analgesia. But evidence of ESPB in PCNL is still lacking. The objective of this study was to systematically analyze the postoperative analgesic effect of ESPB in patients receiving PCNL.

METHODS

The literature searching was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Clinical Trial Database (clinicaltrials.gov). Two independent researchers screened the included studies and extracted data. Meta-analysis was conducted by using the random-effect model with 95% confidence intervals. Chi-squared test with a significance level of 0.1 was utilized to evaluate the heterogeneity of included studies. The subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis were conducted in studies with high heterogeneity. The publication bias was assessed based on whether there were discrepancies between prospective trial registration and reported protocols.

RESULTS

There were 8 studies involving 456 patients assessing the efficacy of ESPB in reducing postoperative pain score of PCNL compared with no block or other blocks, such as subcutaneous infiltration, general anesthesia or TPVB intrathecal morphine. ESPB was a significantly effective and safe anesthesia method, which not only improved postoperative pain response (MD -1.76; 95% CI -2.57 to -0.94; I 2 = 85%; p<0.01), but also reduced analgesic consumption (MD -16.92; 95% CI -26.25 to -7.59; I 2 = 92.2%; p<0.01) and prolonged the time of first request for postoperative analgesia (MD 93.27; 95% CI 35.79 to 150.75; I 2 = 85.3%; p = 0.001) in patients receiving PCNL without significant postoperative complications (MD 0.80; 95% CI 0.31 to 2.03; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.404).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with no block or other blocks, the ESPB was a safe and effective anesthesia for patients receiving PCNL.

Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

Background Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is presently the preferred method for managing renal calculi. Visceral pain from the kidney and ureter and somatic pain from the incision site are the primary causes of immediate postoperative pain following PCNL. Poor pain control is associated with unwanted consequences such as patient discomfort, delayed recovery, and prolonged hospital stay. Recently, the erector spinae plane (ESP) block has been used in many thoracic and abdominal surgeries for the control of postoperative pain. In this study, we aimed to assess the effectiveness of the ultrasound-guided ESP block following PCNL. Methodology This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study including 60 patients who were scheduled for elective PCNL under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group E underwent an ultrasound-guided ESP block with 20 mL of the local anesthetic mixture at the T-9 level unilaterally on the side of surgery, and group C was a sham group in which 20 mL of normal saline was injected on the side of surgery. Changes in postoperative pain score were the primary outcome, and the duration of analgesia, the total analgesic requirement in 24 hours, and patient satisfaction were the secondary outcomes. Results The demographic data of both groups were comparable. The Visual Analog Scale score was considerably lower in group E than in group C at two, four, six, and eight hours postoperatively. In group E, the mean analgesic duration was substantially longer than that in group C (8.87 ± 2.45 hours vs. 5.67 ± 1.58 hours, respectively). The tramadol requirement was higher in group C (286.67 ± 62.88 mg) than in group E (133.33 ± 47.95 mg) during the 24-hour postoperative period. At 12 hours, patient satisfaction was considerably higher in group E than in group C (6.73 ± 0.45 vs. 5.87 ± 0.35, respectively). Conclusions The ultrasound-guided ESP block provided efficient postoperative pain relief, prolonged duration of analgesia, and reduced tramadol intake after PCNL surgery.

Erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia following percutaneous nephrolithotomy under spinal anaesthesia- A randomised controlled study

Background and Aims

Postoperative pain is a multitude of various irksome sensory, emotional and mental experiences aggravated by surgical trauma and associated with autonomic, endocrine, metabolic, physiological and behavioural responses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in postoperative analgesia following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) under spinal anaesthesia.

Methods

This prospective randomised study was conducted on sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II patients scheduled for PCNL under spinal anaesthesia. They were randomised into two equal groups of thirty patients. ESPB was given in group A with 20 ml of injection bupivacaine 0.25% and dexamethasone 8 mg and group B received injection tramadol 1.5 mg/kg intravenously immediately after PCNL. The primary outcome was comparison of visual analogue scale (VAS) score in the first 24 h postoperatively, whereas secondary objectives included hemodynamic variables and requirement of rescue analgesia.

Results

VAS score in group A (ESPB) with mean of 3.15 ± 0.68 was comparatively low when compared to group B with mean of 6.61 ± 0.50 at 6 hours. After 4 h postoperatively, VAS scores continued to be higher and significant number of patients required rescue analgesia in group B.

Conclusion

ESPB reduced VAS score, provided adequate postoperative analgesia, with similar haemodynamic changes and adverse effects in comparison to the conventional analgesia with tramadol in PCNL.

Efficiency and safety of erector spinae plane block in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To pool the data of published studies using the meta-analysis method to provide a high level evidence for the use of ESPB in pain control after PCNL.

METHODS

Two main stream databases, Pubmed and Embase, were used to identify potentially included studies. Primary outcomes included pain visual analogue scale (VAS) at different time points, intraoperative fentanyl use, time to first rescue analgesia and total tramadol or paracetamol consumption. Secondary outcome was defined as side effects of nausea and vomiting.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were identified after database searching and 6 studies were included in the quantitative analysis. Overall, ESPB could significantly reduce the postoperative short-time (1-2h) and long-time (24h) VAS values (MD: -1.35, 95%CI: -1.71, -1.00 for short-time and MD: -0.39, 95%CI: -0.61, -0.17 for long-time) without significant heterogeneity. When it came to other primary outcomes, ESPB still showed its advantages in less intraoperative fentanyl use and total tramadol/paracetamol consumption, and longer time to first rescue analgesia. Complications were similar between groups (OR:0.90, 95%CI:0.38-2.14).

CONCLUSIONS

ESPB was an efficient and safe procedure for postoperative pain management in PCNL. More RCTs with larger sample size are still needed.

Comparison of the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided transmuscular quadratus lumborum block versus thoracic erector spinae block for postoperative analgesia in caesarean section parturients under spinal anaesthesia-A randomised study

Background and Aims

Truncal blocks play an important role in multimodal analgesia regimens to manage the postoperative pain after lower segment caesarean section (LSCS). This study was aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided transmuscular quadratus lumborum block (TQLB) and thoracic erector spinae plane block (TESPB) in parturients of LSCS done under subarachnoid block (SAB).

Methods

In a randomised and double blind study, 60 parturients scheduled for LSCS under spinal anaesthesia were randomly divided into two equal groups: group E (n = 30) and group Q (n = 30). After surgery, each parturient received either US guided bilateral TQLB (group Q) or TESPB (group E) with 20 ml 0.375% ropivacaine and 4 mg dexamethasone on each side. Assessments were done at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 h. The primary objective was to compare the duration of analgesia (first request to rescue analgesia) and the secondary objectives were to compare pain scores [numerical rating score (NRS)], total amount of tramadol consumption, incidence of nausea-vomiting, parturient satisfaction and other adverse effects in 24 hours postoperatively.

Results

The duration of analgesia (mean ± standard deviation) was comparable in group E (11.90 ± 2.49 h) and group Q (12.56 ± 3.38 h), P = 0.19. Pain scores (NRS) at rest and on movement were comparable at all time points of 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 h (P > 0.05). The amount of tramadol used was comparable in group E and group Q (P = 0.48).

Conclusion

TESPB and TQLB are equally efficacious to provide postoperative analgesia after LSCS done under SAB when used as a part of multimodal analgesia.