Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracic Epidural Block for Chest Trauma
NCT ID: NCT03797079
Last Updated: 2021-06-10
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.
COMPLETED
NA
50 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-01-20
2020-04-20
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 Versus Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Patients With Multiple Fracture Ribs
NCT03853330
Comparison Between Retrolaminar Block Combined With Erector Spinae Plane Block, and Erector Spinae Plane Block Alone for Post-thoracotomy Pain
NCT05791539
Ultrasound Guided Erector Spinae Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Thoracotomy Patients
NCT03749395
Comparison Between Erector Spinae Plane Block And Retrolaminar Block In Patients Undergoing VATS.
NCT06021327
Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Thoracic Epidural Analgesia
NCT06571188
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Aim of the Study:
The aim of this study is to assess the quality of pain relief and improvement of pulmonary function in patients with chest trauma receiving either continuous ESP block or TEA by comparing and evaluating the differences between the two techniques. It is hypothesized that ESP block will be comparable to TEA as a promising effective analgesic alternative with fewer side effects.
Sample Size Calculation:
The literature available on ESP block is limited to some sporadic case reports and editorials. Hence, this clinical trial will be conducted on 50 patients and post hoc analysis will be performed using pain scores obtained from the present study with an α (type I error) = 0.05 and β (type II error) = 0.2 (power = 80%).
Methods:
The study will be conducted in Mansoura Emergency Hospital on fifty patients admitted with chest trauma. They will be randomly assigned to two equal groups (ESP group and TEA group) according to computer-generated table of random numbers using the permuted block randomization method. The group allocation will be concealed in sequentially numbered, sealed opaque envelopes which will be opened only after obtaining the written informed consent. Patient demographic data including age, sex, body weight, and status of American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) will be recorded. A written informed consent will be obtained from all study subjects after ensuring confidentiality. The study protocol will be explained to all patients after enrollment into the study. In both groups, catheter-based analgesia will be performed with a bolus dose of bupivacaine followed by a continuous infusion for 48 hours. Later on, the catheters will be removed, and the pain management will be switched to parental or oral analgesics.
Statistical Methods:
The collected data will be coded, processed, and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) program (version 22) for Windows. Normality of numerical data distribution will be tested by Shapiro-Wilk test. Continuous data of normal distribution will be presented as mean ± standard deviation, and compared with the unpaired student's t test. Non-normally distributed data will be presented as median (range), and compared with the Mann-Whitney U test. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) test will be used for comparisons within the same group. Categorical data will be presented as number (percentage), and compared with the Chi-square test. All data will be considered statistically significant if P value is ≤ 0.05.
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
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group A (ESP block)
Ultrasound-guided ESP block will be performed under strict aseptic precautions with patient in the sitting position. Catheter insertion will be performed and bupivacaine will be administered.
ESP block
A high-frequency linear ultrasound probe will be placed superficial to erector spinae muscle (ESM) in a parasagittal plane 3 cm lateral to the midline at the level of fifth thoracic vertebra. Three muscles will be identified superficial to the hyperechoic transverse process shadow: trapezius (uppermost), rhomboids major (middle), and ESM (lowermost). After local infiltration of skin and using in-plane approach, an 18 G Tuohy needle will be inserted, until the tip lay between the rhomboid major muscle and ESM.
Catheter insertion
After obtaining loss of resistance, 20 G epidural catheter will be threaded for 5 cm and then fixed on the skin.
Bupivacaine
After the negative aspiration for blood, a bolus dose of 15 ml 0.125% plain bupivacaine will be injected in the catheter, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.25% plain bupivacaine at the rate of 0.1 ml/kg/h for 48 hours
Group B (TEA)
TEA will be performed under strict aseptic precautions with patient in the sitting position. Catheter insertion will be performed and bupivacaine will be administered.
TEA
Skin will be locally infiltrated at the site of needle insertion, and 18 G Tuohy needle will be introduced until its tip lay in the epidural space of the T5-T6 thoracic intervertebral space.
Catheter insertion
After obtaining loss of resistance, 20 G epidural catheter will be threaded for 5 cm and then fixed on the skin.
Bupivacaine
After the negative aspiration for blood, a bolus dose of 15 ml 0.125% plain bupivacaine will be injected in the catheter, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.25% plain bupivacaine at the rate of 0.1 ml/kg/h for 48 hours
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
ESP block
A high-frequency linear ultrasound probe will be placed superficial to erector spinae muscle (ESM) in a parasagittal plane 3 cm lateral to the midline at the level of fifth thoracic vertebra. Three muscles will be identified superficial to the hyperechoic transverse process shadow: trapezius (uppermost), rhomboids major (middle), and ESM (lowermost). After local infiltration of skin and using in-plane approach, an 18 G Tuohy needle will be inserted, until the tip lay between the rhomboid major muscle and ESM.
TEA
Skin will be locally infiltrated at the site of needle insertion, and 18 G Tuohy needle will be introduced until its tip lay in the epidural space of the T5-T6 thoracic intervertebral space.
Catheter insertion
After obtaining loss of resistance, 20 G epidural catheter will be threaded for 5 cm and then fixed on the skin.
Bupivacaine
After the negative aspiration for blood, a bolus dose of 15 ml 0.125% plain bupivacaine will be injected in the catheter, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.25% plain bupivacaine at the rate of 0.1 ml/kg/h for 48 hours
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
* Blunt chest trauma.
* Multiple rib fractures.
* Flail chest.
* Lung contusions.
Exclusion Criteria
* Intubated patients.
* Other peripheral or abdominal injuries.
* Traumatic brain injury, altered mental status or un-cooperative patients.
* Acute spine fractures or pre-existing spine deformity.
* Unstable hemodynamics.
* Sensitivity to local anesthetic drugs.
* Coagulation abnormalities.
* Infection at the site of procedure.
* Significant cardiac or respiratory dysfunction, hepatic or renal impairment.
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Sameh Fathy
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Sameh Fathy
Lecturer of anesthesia, ICU & pain management; Faculty of Medicine
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Sameh M El-Sherbiny, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Mansoura University Hospitals
Al Mansurah, Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Forero M, Adhikary SD, Lopez H, Tsui C, Chin KJ. The Erector Spinae Plane Block: A Novel Analgesic Technique in Thoracic Neuropathic Pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):621-7. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000451.
Gage A, Rivara F, Wang J, Jurkovich GJ, Arbabi S. The effect of epidural placement in patients after blunt thoracic trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014 Jan;76(1):39-45; discussion 45-6. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3182ab1b08.
Galvagno SM Jr, Smith CE, Varon AJ, Hasenboehler EA, Sultan S, Shaefer G, To KB, Fox AD, Alley DE, Ditillo M, Joseph BA, Robinson BR, Haut ER. Pain management for blunt thoracic trauma: A joint practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma and Trauma Anesthesiology Society. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016 Nov;81(5):936-951. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000001209.
Nagaraja PS, Ragavendran S, Singh NG, Asai O, Bhavya G, Manjunath N, Rajesh K. Comparison of continuous thoracic epidural analgesia with bilateral erector spinae plane block for perioperative pain management in cardiac surgery. Ann Card Anaesth. 2018 Jul-Sep;21(3):323-327. doi: 10.4103/aca.ACA_16_18.
Singh S, Jacob M, Hasnain S, Krishnakumar M. Comparison between continuous thoracic epidural block and continuous thoracic paravertebral block in the management of thoracic trauma. Med J Armed Forces India. 2017 Apr;73(2):146-151. doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2016.11.005. Epub 2016 Dec 24.
Veiga M, Costa D, Brazao I. Erector spinae plane block for radical mastectomy: A new indication? Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim (Engl Ed). 2018 Feb;65(2):112-115. doi: 10.1016/j.redar.2017.08.004. Epub 2017 Nov 2. English, Spanish.
Witt CE, Bulger EM. Comprehensive approach to the management of the patient with multiple rib fractures: a review and introduction of a bundled rib fracture management protocol. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2017 Jan 5;2(1):e000064. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2016-000064. eCollection 2017.
Yeh DD, Kutcher ME, Knudson MM, Tang JF. Epidural analgesia for blunt thoracic injury--which patients benefit most? Injury. 2012 Oct;43(10):1667-71. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2012.05.022. Epub 2012 Jun 16.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ESP Block for Chest Trauma
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.