scholarly journals Ultrasound-guided single erector spinae plane block versus thoracic paravertebral block for patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: a single center randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danxu Ma ◽  
Huilong Ren ◽  
Xueyang Li ◽  
Huili Li ◽  
Jia Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Postoperative Analgesia ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Erector Spinae ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Thoracic Paravertebral Block ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Erector Spinae Plane Block ◽  
Vas Scores

Abstract Background: Whether ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) can replace thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of ESPB compared with TPVB for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy under general anesthesia. Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial divided patients into a control group, a TPVB group (0.3 mL/kg, 0.5% ropivacaine), and an ESPB group (0.5 mL/kg, 0.5% ropivacaine). Dermatomes with loss of pinprick sensation, were recorded during 30 min after block administration. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores, total analgesic dose, and complications after surgery were recorded. Results: Whether at rest or during coughing, the VAS scores were lower in ESPB group at 1, 6, 18, 24, and 48 h after surgery compared with the Control group. VAS scores were similar in the ESPB and TPVB groups at 1 h, but were lower in the ESPB group at 6, 18, 24, and 48 h postoperatively. Conclusions: Single ESPB provided superior postoperative analgesia than TPVB, without causing any adverse effect.

scholarly journals Ultrasound-guided single erector spinae plane block versus thoracic paravertebral block for patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: a randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danxu Ma ◽  
Huilong Ren ◽  
Xueyang Li ◽  
Huili Li ◽  
Jia Jiang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Postoperative Analgesia ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Erector Spinae ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Thoracic Paravertebral Block ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Video Assisted ◽  
Vas Scores

Abstract Background: Whether erector spinae plane (ESP) block can replace thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) remains unknown. This study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided ESP block compared with TPVB for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy under general anesthesia. Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial divided patients into a control group, a TPVB group (0.3 mL/kg, 0.5% ropivacaine), and an ESP group (0.5 mL/kg, 0.5% ropivacaine). Dermatomes with loss of pinprick sensation, heart rate, and mean arterial pressure were recorded during 30 min after block administration. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores, total analgesic dose, and complications after surgery were recorded. Results: No obvious hemodynamic fluctuations occurred in the TPVB and ESP groups within 30 min after block administration. The segmental dermatomes with loss of pinprick sensation 30 min after regional block were 4.5 (1.1) dermatomes (T3–T7) in the TPVB group and 5.4 (1.2) dermatomes (T2–T8) in the ESP group. At 1 and 6 h after operation, VAS scores were lower in the TPVB group than in the control group (rest: 1h, P<0.001, 6h, P=0.004; cough: 1h, P<0.001, 6h, P<0.001), but at 18, 24, and 48 h, there was no significant difference (rest: 18h, P=0.18, 24h, P>0.99, 48h, P> 0.99; cough: 8h, P>0.99, 24h, P>0.99, 48h, P>0.99). VAS scores were similar in the TPVB and ESP groups at 1 h postoperatively (rest: P>0.99, cough: P>0.99), but were lower in the ESP group at 6, 18, 24, and 48 h (rest: 6h, P=0.018, 18h, P<0.001, 24h, P< 0.001, 48h, P<0.001; cough: 6h, P=0.004, 18h, P<0.001, 24h, P=0.004, 48h, P= 0.003). The doses of postoperative patient-controlled analgesia and rescue analgesia were lower in the TPVB and ESP groups than in the control group and were lower in the ESP group than in the TPVB group No block-related complications occurred. Conclusions: Single ESP block provided superior postoperative analgesia than TPVB, without causing any adverse effect.Trial registration: The study was approved by the ethics committee of Beijing Chaoyang Hospital (2017-ke-81). The trial was registered retrospectively at the Clinical Trial Registry of China (ChiCTR-INR-17011499) on May 26, 2017.

scholarly journals Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus rhomboid intercostal block for postoperative analgesia following thoracotomy: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahsin Şimşek ◽  
Fatih Dogu Geyik ◽  
Aynur Kaynar Simsek ◽  
Yucel Yuce ◽  
Kemal Tolga Saracoglu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Analgesia ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Erector Spinae ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Erector Spinae Plane Block ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
Intercostal Block

Introduction For pain relief after thoracotomy, opioids and thoracic paravertebral and epidural interventions are frequently used. In recent years, interfascial blocks such as the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and rhomboid intercostal block (RIB) have started to be used for analgesia. We aimed to compare the postoperative analgesic effect of ESPB, RIB, and a control group in pain management after open thoracotomy. Material and methods This is a randomized controlled trial. A total of 75 patients were included in three groups as the ESPB, RIB, and control (C) groups. In block groups, the blockage was performed with 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine. In Group C, no procedures other than the standard postoperative analgesia protocol were performed. The postoperative analgesic consumptions of the patients, time of first analgesic need, and visual analog scale (VAS) values were recorded. Results The mean 24-hour tramadol consumption was 124±29.08 mg in group ESPB and 116±28.65 mg in group RIB, and the results were statistically similar (p>0.05). In Group C, the consumption is 204±44.06 mg; significantly higher than group ESPB and group RIB (p=0.004). Time to the first analgesic requirement was 355±55.69 min in group ESPB and 339.12±54.39 min in group RIB. There was no difference between groups (p>0.05). In Group C, this time was 218.91±56.73 minutes. We observed that group ESPB and group RIB needed analgesics later (p=0.006). VAS scores and the number of patients requiring analgesics were similar in group ESPB and group RIB (p>0.05). In Group C, on the other hand, VAS scores and the number of patients requiring analgesics were higher than both groups in which block was applied (p<0.05). Conclusion ESPB and RIB were similar and they are more effective in comparison to the standard protocol in the control group, whereas the former did not have superiority over each other.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document