Zheng Shaoqiang, Zhou Yan, Zhang Wenchao, Zhao Yaoping, Hu Lin, Zheng Shan, Wang Geng, Wang Tianlong
Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, China.
Department of Spinal Surgery, Beijng Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, China.
Front Surg. 2023 Jan 6;9:1020273. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1020273. eCollection 2022.
Spinal surgery causes severe postoperative pain. An erector spinae plane (ESP) block can relieve postoperative pain, but the optimal blocking method has not been defined. The aim of this study is to compare the feasibility of a one-level and a two-level lumbar ESP block and their effect on intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in lumbar spinal surgery.
A total of 83 adult patients who were scheduled for posterior lumbar interbody fusion were randomly divided into two groups. Patients in Group I ( = 42) received an ultrasound-guided bilateral one-level ESP block with 0.3% ropivacaine, while patients in Group II ( = 41) received a bilateral two-level ESP block. Blocking effectiveness was evaluated, including whether a sensory block covered the surgical incision, sensory decrease in anterior thigh, and quadriceps strength decrease. Intraoperative anesthetic dosage, postoperative visual analogue scale scores of pain, opioid consumption, rescue analgesia, and opioid-related side effects were analyzed.
Of the total number, 80 patients completed the clinical trial and were included in the analysis, with 40 in each group. The time to complete the ESP block was significantly longer in Group II than in Group I (16.0 [14.3, 17.0] min vs. 9.0 [8.3, 9.0] min, = 0.000). The rate of the sensory block covering the surgical incision at 30 min was significantly higher in Group II than in Group I (100% [40/40] vs. 85.0% [34/40], = 0.026). The rate of the sensory block in the anterior thigh was higher in Group II (43.8% [35/80] vs. 27.5% [22/80], = 0.032), but the rate of quadriceps strength decrease did not differ significantly between the groups. The mean effect-site remifentanil concentration during intervertebral decompression was lower in Group II than in Group I (2.9 ± 0.3 ng/ml vs. 3.3 ± 0.5 ng/ml, = 0.007).There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of intraoperative analgesic consumption, postoperative analgesic consumption, and postoperative VAS pain scores at rest and with movement within 24 h. There were no block failures, block-related complications, and postoperative infection.
Among patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion, the two-level ESP block provided a higher rate of coverage of the surgical incision by the sensory block when compared with the one-level method, without increasing the incidence of procedure-related complications.
www.chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2100043596.
脊柱手术会导致严重的术后疼痛。竖脊肌平面(ESP)阻滞可缓解术后疼痛,但最佳阻滞方法尚未明确。本研究的目的是比较单节段和双节段腰椎ESP阻滞的可行性及其对腰椎手术术中及术后镇痛的效果。
总共83例计划行后路腰椎椎间融合术的成年患者被随机分为两组。第一组(n = 42)患者接受超声引导下双侧单节段ESP阻滞,使用0.3%罗哌卡因,而第二组(n = 41)患者接受双侧双节段ESP阻滞。评估阻滞效果,包括感觉阻滞是否覆盖手术切口、大腿前侧感觉减退以及股四头肌力量减弱情况。分析术中麻醉药物用量、术后疼痛视觉模拟评分、阿片类药物消耗量、补救性镇痛以及阿片类药物相关副作用。
总共有80例患者完成临床试验并纳入分析,每组40例。第二组完成ESP阻滞的时间明显长于第一组(16.0 [14.3, 17.0]分钟对9.0 [8.3, 9.0]分钟,P = 0.000)。30分钟时感觉阻滞覆盖手术切口的比例在第二组明显高于第一组(100% [40/40]对85.0% [34/40],P = 0.026)。第二组大腿前侧感觉阻滞的比例更高(43.8% [35/80]对27.5% [22/80],P = 0.032),但两组股四头肌力量减弱的比例差异无统计学意义。第二组椎间减压期间瑞芬太尼的平均效应室浓度低于第一组(2.9±0.3纳克/毫升对3.3±0.5纳克/毫升,P = 0.007)。两组在术中镇痛药物消耗量、术后镇痛药物消耗量以及术后24小时静息和活动时的VAS疼痛评分方面无显著差异。没有阻滞失败、阻滞相关并发症和术后感染情况。
在接受后路腰椎椎间融合术的患者中,与单节段方法相比,双节段ESP阻滞的感觉阻滞覆盖手术切口的比例更高,且不增加手术相关并发症的发生率。