Should the Erector Spinae Plane Block Be Applied in the Pain Management of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

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.

Analgesia and spread of erector spinae plane block in breast cancer surgeries: a randomized controlled trial

Background

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and spread of variable volumes of local anesthetics (LA) in Erector spinae plane block (ESPB).

Methods

Sixty patients aged between 18 and 50 years with an ASA I-II and scheduled for breast cancer surgery were randomized to receive either ESPB with 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine (Standard volume ESPB), or with 40 ml 0.125% bupivacaine (High volume ESPB), or no ESPB (GA only group). The primary outcome was pain intensity evaluated by the visual analogue scale (VAS), 12 hours after surgery. P-values < 0.05 were considered the cutoff point for statistical significance. The secondary outcomes were pain at rest and pain on movement evaluated by the VAS, craniocaudal injectate spread, to paravertebral (PV) and epidural spaces assessed by CT, clinical dermatomal spread, level of sedation or agitation, and patient satisfaction with anesthesia and analgesia.

Results

VAS at rest 12 h after surgery was less in both intervention groups compared to the control (1.75 ± 0.79 vs. 1.6 ± 0.88 vs. 3.4 ± 1.96, p = 0.001). The LA had extended further in the high volume group than the standard volume group (11.20 ± 3.07 vs. 9.15 ± 2.54 vertebral levels, p = 0.027). No difference of the spread to PV or epidural spaces between the 2 intervention groups. More dermatomes were covered in the high volume group (7.20 ± 2.12 vs. 5.75 ± 1.37 dermatomes, p = 0.014). Agitation was higher in the GA only group than both ESPB groups in the first 8 postoperative hours. Patients were more satisfied in both ESPB groups than the GA only group.

Conclusions

Preoperative ESPB is an excellent analgesic modality and it can also attenuate both postoperative agitation and sedation. Doubling the injectate volume enhances the craniocaudal spreading and may be useful for surgeries requiring multiple dermatomes. However, larger volume has no effect on analgesic efficacy or patient satisfaction as there is no further spread to the PV, epidural spaces or spinal nerve rami.

Trial registration

NCT04796363 (12/3/2021).