Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Bursa City Hospital, Sciences Bursa Faculty of Medicine, University of Health, 16110, Bursa, Nilufer, Turkey.
Department of Neurosurgery, Bursa City Hospital, University of Health Sciences Bursa Faculty of Medicine, Bursa, Turkey.
Eur Spine J. 2024 Jul;33(7):2630-2636. doi: 10.1007/s00586-024-08347-x. Epub 2024 Jun 4.
Spinal surgery is associated with severe diffuse pain in the postoperative period. Effective pain management plays an essential role in reducing morbidity and mortality. This study is designed to compare the ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block and surgical infiltrative ESP block for postoperative analgesia management after lumbar spinal fusion surgery.
The patients who underwent two or three levels of posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery were randomly allocated into one of three groups with 30 patients each (Group SE = Surgical ESP block; Group UE = ultrasound-guided ESP block; Group C = Controls). The primary aim was to compare postoperative opioid consumption, and the secondary aim was to evaluate postoperative dynamic and static pain scores and the incidence of opioid-related adverse effects.
There was a significant difference in terms of opioid consumption, rescue analgesia on demand, and both static and dynamic pain scores between groups at all time periods (p < 0.05). Group SE and Group UE had lower pain scores and consumed fewer opioids than the controls (p < 0.05). However, the Group UE had lower pain scores and opioid consumption than the Group SE. The sedation level of patients was significantly higher in the control group than in the other two groups. Also, nausea was more common in controls than in the other groups.
While both surgical and ultrasound-guided ESP blocks reduced opioid consumption compared to the controls, the patients who received ultrasound-guided ESP blocks experienced better postsurgical pain relief than those in the other groups (surgical ESP and controls).
脊柱手术后会出现严重的弥漫性疼痛。有效的疼痛管理对于降低发病率和死亡率至关重要。本研究旨在比较超声引导竖脊肌平面(ESP)阻滞和手术浸润性 ESP 阻滞在腰椎融合术后的术后镇痛管理中的效果。
接受两到三个节段后路腰椎融合术的患者被随机分为三组,每组 30 例(SE 组=手术 ESP 阻滞;UE 组=超声引导 ESP 阻滞;C 组=对照组)。主要目的是比较术后阿片类药物的消耗,次要目的是评估术后动态和静态疼痛评分以及阿片类药物相关不良反应的发生率。
在所有时间点,三组在阿片类药物消耗、按需解救镇痛、静态和动态疼痛评分方面均有显著差异(p<0.05)。SE 组和 UE 组的疼痛评分和阿片类药物消耗均低于对照组(p<0.05)。然而,UE 组的疼痛评分和阿片类药物消耗均低于 SE 组。对照组患者的镇静水平明显高于其他两组。此外,对照组恶心的发生率高于其他两组。
与对照组相比,手术和超声引导 ESP 阻滞均减少了阿片类药物的消耗,但接受超声引导 ESP 阻滞的患者术后疼痛缓解效果优于其他两组(手术 ESP 阻滞和对照组)。