Efficacy of erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia lumbar surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

12Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: The erector spinae plane (ESP) block is a newly defined regional anesthesia technique first described in 2016. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of ESP block in improving analgesia following lumbar surgery. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the analgesic efficacy of the ESP block with non-block care for lumbar surgery from inception 3 August 2021. The primary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores during the first 24 h. Postoperative pain was measured as pain at rest and on movement at postoperative 0, 4, 8, 12, and 24 h expressed on a visual analog scale (VAS), where 0 = no pain and 10 = the most severe pain. Results: 11 studies involving 775 patients were included in our analysis. The use of ESP block significantly decreased 24-h opioid consumption (WMD, -8.70; 95% CI, -10.48 to -6.93; I2 = 97.5%; P < 0.001) compared with the non-block. Moreover, ESP block reduced pain scores at postoperative time-points up to 24 h. ESP block also prolonged the time to first analgesic request (WMD = 6.93; 95% CI: 3.44 to 10.43, I2 = 99.8%; P < 0.001). There was less PONV with ESP block versus non-block group (RR, 0.354; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.56; I2 = 25.2%; P < 0.001), but no difference in pruritus. Conclusions: ESP block provides less opioid consumption and PONV, lower pain scores, and longer time to first analgesic request in patients undergoing lumbar surgery compared to general anesthesia alone.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sun, Q., Zhang, C., Liu, S., Lv, H., Liu, W., Pan, Z., & Song, Z. (2023). Efficacy of erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia lumbar surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Anesthesiology, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-023-02013-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free