Erector Spinae Plane Block for Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery
NCT ID: NCT03628040
Last Updated: 2019-06-24
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
PHASE3
82 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-09-01
2021-01-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) Block vs Intravenous Lignocaine Infusion in (VATS)
NCT06289790
Erector Spinae Block Versus Surgeon Infiltration in VATS Procedures
NCT03859635
Erector Spinae Plane Block For Analgesia Following Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery
NCT03860480
Effects of Thoracic Erector Spinae Plane Blockade on Acute and Chronic Pain After Video Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS)
NCT04208542
Comparison of Three Different Pain Blocks for Subjects Undergoing VATS (Video Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery) Procedure.
NCT03151434
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
While acute pain after VATS is less than the traditional thoracotomy, patients still experience moderate amount of pain within the first 24 hours. Source of pain may be from diaphragm irritation, surgical incisions and chest tubes. Because of its origin on the chest wall, pain from VATS worsens with breathing. When pain is poorly controlled, it will lead to a shallow breathing pattern called "splinting" and this can progress to respiratory distress or failure. Given the high incidence of smoking history in this patient population, many would have presented with poor baseline respiratory function. Therefore, it is important to provide good pain control to allow deep breathing and cough to reduce respiratory complications\[1\]\[2\].
Despite the smaller incisions, the incidence of chronic post-surgical pain (CPSP) after VATS is surprisingly similar to thoracotomy. The mechanism may be due to nerve compression by the trocar, an instrument inserted between the ribs to allow smooth manipulation of camera and surgical instruments in the thoracic cavity. Additionally, poorly controlled acute pain has also been postulated to lead to the development of CPSP, further emphasizing the importance of good analgesia\[1\].
Many regional analgesia techniques have been tried to improve postoperative analgesia. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) remains the gold standard of pain control after thoracic surgery. Although it provides superior analgesia, its use is hindered by the rare but serious complication of epidural hematoma and abscess which may cause paralysis. Further, pain from VATS tends to be short-lived (less than 24 hours), making the risk to benefit ratio less ideal for TEA. An alternative to TEA is paravertebral block (PVB). Compared to TEA, it causes less hypotension and hematoma or abscess at the paravertebral space may be less consequential. Nevertheless, PVB is a deep block and is technically demanding which limits its wide adoption\[3\].
Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel nerve block that has been used for analgesia for surgeries of the chest and abdominal wall. Using a bony structure, the transverse process, as the end point, the block needle is very unlikely to cause injury to vital structures as is possible with TEA or PVB (for examples, the spinal cord, lungs and blood vessels). It is also technically easy to perform. ESPB has only been reported in case series but so far, no adverse events such as hypotension, hematoma or infection has been reported. ESPB has also showed promise in managing CPSP after thoracic surgery in a small case series\[4\].
Given its safety, ease of performance and efficacy, the study aims to study the analgesic efficacy of ESPB in addition to systemic analgesia compared to systemic analgesia alone in patients undergoing VATS. The hypothesis is that ESPB and systemic analgesia will provide better analgesia when compared to systemic analgesia alone.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
QUADRUPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Sham Block
Patient will receive a single shot of normal saline 20 mL injected at the erector spinae plane
Normal saline
Normal saline will be injected in the erector spinae plane
Erector Spinae Block
Patient will receive a single shot of Ropivacaine Injection \[Naropin\] 0.5% 20 mL injected at the erector spinae plane
Ropivacaine Injection [Naropin]
Ropivacaine will be injected in the erector spinae plane
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Ropivacaine Injection [Naropin]
Ropivacaine will be injected in the erector spinae plane
Normal saline
Normal saline will be injected in the erector spinae plane
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Scheduled for an elective VATS
3. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I to III
Exclusion Criteria
2. BMI \> 40
3. Patient refusal or inability to provide consent
4. Chronic pain conditions
5. Daily opioid use \> 60 mg of oral morphine equivalents
6. Cognitive or psychiatric condition that makes it challenge to assess pain
7. Conversion to open thoracotomy
8. Allergy to any of the drugs used in this study
9. Contraindication to nerve blocks such as infection, severe coagulopathy or pre-existing neuropathy
10. Significant systemic cardiac, respiratory, hepatic or renal diseases
11. Postoperative admission to intensive care unit
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Cheng Lin
Assistant Professor
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
112452
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.