Erector Spinae Plane Block for Peri-operative Pain Management in Pediatric Open Pyeloplasty Cases
NCT ID: NCT03790566
Last Updated: 2019-02-26
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
NA
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-02-20
2019-09-25
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 Block for Peroperative Analgesia and Intraabdominal Tissue Oxygenation
NCT03808129
The Efficacy of Different Bupivacaine Concentrations in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Transversus Abdominis Plane Block
NCT04202367
Transversus Abdominis Plane Block Versus Erector Spina Plane Block
NCT04095325
Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Quadratus Lumborum Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Children
NCT03463382
Ultrasound Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block in Pediatric Surgery
NCT02723487
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Erector spinae plane (ESP) block was described as an effective block for multi-dermatome pain after thoracic surgery. It is emerging as a safe and easy-to-perform alternative to epidural anesthesia for pelvic, abdominal and thoracic surgery.
During an open pyeloplasty, the flank incision goes through the transversus abdominus plane, where the local anesthetic is injected for TAP block. This may weaken the analgesic effect of the block. In the ESP block, local anesthetic diffuses cranio-caudally through the fascia of erector spinae muscles and the flank incision does not disturb this plane. We aim to compare the effectiveness of ESP block with TAP block in open pyeloplasty patients.
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
PREVENTION
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Erector spinae plane block
With the patient in lateral decubitus position (surgical side up), the transverse processes of T10-T12 vertebrae and erector spinae (ES) fascia are visualized 1-2 cm lateral to the vertebral spine using a linear ultrasound probe. A 22G peripheral block needle is introduced with in-plane technique under the ES muscle and local anesthetic solution (0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine) is injected in this plane after a test injection with 0.5 ml of 0.9% NaCl solution to visualize opening of ESP.
Bupivacaine
0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine
Transversus abdominus plane block
With the patient in supine position, three layers of abdominal muscle are visualized using the linear ultrasound probe held with the long axis on the mid-axillary line above the iliac crest. 22G peripheral block needle is introduced in-plane into the fascia between the internal oblique and transversus abdominus muscles and local anesthetic solution (0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine) is injected in this plane after a test injection with 0.5 ml of 0.9% NaCl solution to visualize opening of ESP.
Bupivacaine
0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Bupivacaine
0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patients scheduled for elective open pyeloplasty surgery
Exclusion Criteria
* Coagulation disorders
* History of chronic pain
* Patient/Family refusal
* History of scoliosis, spinae bifida, abdominal wall defect
* Past surgical procedures with abdominal wall incision
* Plan to extend the flank incision for additional surgical intervention
1 Year
10 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Aybike Onur Gonen
UNKNOWN
Ayse Cigdem Tutuncu
OTHER
Kaya, Guner, M.D.
INDIV
Rahsan Ozcan
UNKNOWN
Istanbul University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
pinar kendigelen
Assoc. Prof.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Pinar Kendigelen, Assoc. Prof.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Istanbul University Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Istanbul University Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty
Istanbul, Please Select, Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
72109855-604.01.01-53213
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.