The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block Compared With Intrathecal Morphine in Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Double-blind Prospective Comparative Study.

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pain physician Pub Date : 2023-03-01
Atef Mohamed Mahmoud, Safaa Gaber Ragab, Mohamad Ahmed Shawky, Doha Hamad Masry, Joseph Makram Botros
{"title":"The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block Compared With Intrathecal Morphine in Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Double-blind Prospective Comparative Study.","authors":"Atef Mohamed Mahmoud,&nbsp;Safaa Gaber Ragab,&nbsp;Mohamad Ahmed Shawky,&nbsp;Doha Hamad Masry,&nbsp;Joseph Makram Botros","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Severe postoperative pain is experienced by most patients who undergo spine surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a successful method for postoperative analgesia and has only minor complications. Intrathecal morphine (ITM) demonstrates high efficacy for analgesia up to 24 hours postsurgery. ESPBs and ITM for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgeries have never been compared in prior studies.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of ESPB and ITM in postoperative analgesia after lumbar spine surgeries.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A double-blind prospective comparative study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>This study was performed at Al Fayoum University Hospital after being confirmed by the local institutional ethical committee (#80) with approval number M520 and retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov number (NCT05123092).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective randomized double-blinded interventional trial was conducted with 82 patients, 41 in each group. In the ESPB group, a 0.25% bupivacaine injection was used to conduct a bilateral ultrasound-guided ESPB. In the ITM group, an injection of 0.3 mg morphine intrathecally was done. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was recorded as the primary outcome. The time to the first analgesic request, intra- and postoperative opioid consumption, hemodynamics, sedation score, and complications were also recorded as secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Postoperative VAS scores were significantly lower in the intrathecal group throughout the postoperative period at all recorded study time points until 48 hours (P < 0.001). Time to the first rescue analgesia and doses of postoperative analgesic required were significant, with a P value of 0.000. Significant differences were found in postoperative oxygen saturation up to 24 hours (P < 0.001) and the sedation score up to 6 hours (P < 0.01). A higher incidence of complications was recorded in the ITM group (P = 0.000).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>We did not measure patient preoperative VAS scores to ensure that the 2 groups were matched in pain severity. Also, we did not compare patient satisfaction. Another limitation was the inability to determine the degree of pain relief of ESPB since there was no control group in our study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We concluded that ITM 0.3 mg provides more potent analgesia up to 48 hours postoperatively than an ESPB, based upon VAS score, analgesic durations, and postoperative analgesic requirements.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":"26 2","pages":"149-159"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Severe postoperative pain is experienced by most patients who undergo spine surgery. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a successful method for postoperative analgesia and has only minor complications. Intrathecal morphine (ITM) demonstrates high efficacy for analgesia up to 24 hours postsurgery. ESPBs and ITM for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgeries have never been compared in prior studies.

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of ESPB and ITM in postoperative analgesia after lumbar spine surgeries.

Study design: A double-blind prospective comparative study.

Setting: This study was performed at Al Fayoum University Hospital after being confirmed by the local institutional ethical committee (#80) with approval number M520 and retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov number (NCT05123092).

Methods: A prospective randomized double-blinded interventional trial was conducted with 82 patients, 41 in each group. In the ESPB group, a 0.25% bupivacaine injection was used to conduct a bilateral ultrasound-guided ESPB. In the ITM group, an injection of 0.3 mg morphine intrathecally was done. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was recorded as the primary outcome. The time to the first analgesic request, intra- and postoperative opioid consumption, hemodynamics, sedation score, and complications were also recorded as secondary outcomes.

Results: Postoperative VAS scores were significantly lower in the intrathecal group throughout the postoperative period at all recorded study time points until 48 hours (P < 0.001). Time to the first rescue analgesia and doses of postoperative analgesic required were significant, with a P value of 0.000. Significant differences were found in postoperative oxygen saturation up to 24 hours (P < 0.001) and the sedation score up to 6 hours (P < 0.01). A higher incidence of complications was recorded in the ITM group (P = 0.000).

Limitations: We did not measure patient preoperative VAS scores to ensure that the 2 groups were matched in pain severity. Also, we did not compare patient satisfaction. Another limitation was the inability to determine the degree of pain relief of ESPB since there was no control group in our study.

Conclusion: We concluded that ITM 0.3 mg provides more potent analgesia up to 48 hours postoperatively than an ESPB, based upon VAS score, analgesic durations, and postoperative analgesic requirements.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
竖脊肌平面阻滞与鞘内吗啡在腰椎手术患者术后镇痛中的疗效:一项双盲前瞻性比较研究。
背景:大多数接受脊柱手术的患者都经历过严重的术后疼痛。直立脊柱平面阻滞(ESPB)是一种成功的术后镇痛方法,并发症很少。鞘内吗啡(ITM)在术后24小时内仍具有较高的镇痛效果。espb和ITM在腰椎手术术后镇痛中的应用在以往的研究中从未比较过。目的:比较ESPB与ITM在腰椎手术后镇痛中的作用。研究设计:双盲前瞻性比较研究。环境:本研究经当地机构伦理委员会(第80号)确认后在Al Fayoum大学医院进行,批准号为M520,并在clinicaltrials.gov上回顾性注册,注册号为NCT05123092。方法:采用前瞻性随机双盲介入试验,82例患者,每组41例。ESPB组采用0.25%布比卡因注射剂行双侧超声引导下ESPB。ITM组鞘内注射吗啡0.3 mg。视觉模拟评分(VAS)作为主要观察指标。第一次使用镇痛药的时间、术中和术后阿片类药物的消耗、血流动力学、镇静评分和并发症也被记录为次要结果。结果:在所有记录的研究时间点,鞘内组在术后48小时内的VAS评分均显著降低(P < 0.001)。第一次抢救镇痛时间和术后所需镇痛药剂量有显著性差异,P值为0.000。两组术后24小时血氧饱和度(P < 0.001)和6小时镇静评分(P < 0.01)差异有统计学意义。ITM组并发症发生率较高(P = 0.000)。局限性:我们没有测量患者术前VAS评分,以确保两组疼痛严重程度匹配。同样,我们没有比较病人的满意度。另一个限制是无法确定ESPB的疼痛缓解程度,因为我们的研究中没有对照组。结论:基于VAS评分、镇痛持续时间和术后镇痛需求,我们得出结论:ITM 0.3 mg在术后48小时内比ESPB提供更有效的镇痛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Lead-shielding on the Utilization of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Among Patients with Spinal Cord Stimulation Systems: A Study of Retrospective Claims in the US. Letter to all MACs regarding Proposed LCD - Peripheral Nerve Blocks and Procedures for Chronic Pain. In Response to: Request for Withdrawal of Publication of "Rapid Recommendations by Busse et al of Commonly Used Interventional Procedures for Non-Cancer Chronic Spine Pain: A Clinical Practice Guidelines". Letter to CMS on Physician Payment Reform regarding CMS1832P. Lumbar Medial Branch Radiofrequency Ablation: Technical Suggestions Based on Emerging Ex-Vivo Evidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1