ERECTOR SPINE PLANE BLOCK VERSUS LOCAL INFILTRATION ANAESTHESIA FOR TRANSFORAMINAL PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC DISCECTOMY

NCT ID: NCT05483647

Last Updated: 2022-08-04

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

52 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-01-01

Study Completion Date

2022-07-05

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The main aim of our study was to test the hypothesis that Erector spine plane block (ESP) with sedation will provide the similar employment of fentanyl and propofol during surgery as an infiltrative local anaesthesia with sedation. The primary endpoint was the quantity of fentanyl and propofol during surgery.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Primary outcome: amount of fentanyl and propofol during surgery. Secondary outcomes: adverse events during sedation using World Society of Intravenous Anaesthesia (SIVA) adverse sedation event reporting tool \[15\], level of postoperative sedation with Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), intensity of pain after surgery using a visual analogue scale (VAS), the mechanical pain threshold (MPT) with von Frey monofilaments measured on both lower extremities, satisfaction with analgesia using 5-point Likert scale.

In both groups, intraoperative analgesia was provided by fentanyl, intraoperative sedation by propofol. Fentanyl was administered to the patients of booth groups in the case of low back pain complaint and/or increasing in heart rate and blood pressure more than 20% of baseline in the dose of 50 μg. If case of sharp shooting pain in lower extremity the surgeon changed the position of the endoscope in order not to irritate the spinal cord root, fentanyl was not administrated.

After performing the local infiltrative anaesthesia or ESP, propofol was given by target-controlled infusion based on the propofol pharmacokinetic parameters reported by Eleveld 2.1 \[16\]. The initial propofol plasma concentration target was 1,0 μg ml-1 in both groups (we used iTIVA plus Anaesthesia software v5.2.3 to predict the propofol concentrations). Subsequently, the infusion rate of propofol was changed in order to reach not less than 2-3 score levels of modified observer's assessment of alertness/sedation scale (MOAA/S).

During procedural sedation was used World SIVA adverse sedation event reporting tool. All five steps which require this tool were completed. If there were one or more adverse events associated with this sedation encounter (minimal risk descriptors, minor risk descriptors, sentinel risk descriptors or other) they were described. Interventions that were performed to treat the adverse events and the outcomes of the adverse events were also noted.

After the discharge from the operating room to postoperative ward, the level of postoperative sedation was accessed using RASS. Two hours after surgery intensity of pain and the mechanical pain threshold were obtained as well as satisfaction with analgesia using 5-point Likert scale.

To determine the mechanical pain threshold after surgery Von Frey monofilaments were used. The set consists of 20 nylon filaments of different thicknesses in ascending order. Patients were asked to lie down on their backs, close their eyes and inform the doctor when they felt a clear point of contact with the skin. Monofilaments were pressed against the skin of the middle third of the palmar surface of the forearm at an angle of 90 ° until the filament bends for 2 seconds. Monofilaments were used in ascending order with an interval of 10 seconds.

All patients in the operating room received paracetamol, dexketoprofen, ondansetron, dexamethasone, and tranexamic acid. In prone position, before the skin incision, patients in G1 underwent local infiltrative anaesthesia et the level of incision. The skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscles up to the foramen intervertebral were anesthetized by the surgeon employing forty millilitre solution of Lidocaine 1% with Dexamethasone 0.02% and Epinephrine 0.00018%. Patients in G2 underwent bilateral ESP. The transverse vertebral process of the required level of spine was identified using the mobile C-arm X-ray System. When the tip of the 22G needle reached to the transverse vertebral process 3 cm lateral to the spinous process, a solution of 40 millilitres of Lidocaine 1% with Dexamethasone 0.02% and Epinephrine 0.00018% was injected under the erector spinae muscle bilaterally. For postoperative analgesia, patients in both groups received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (paracetamol in combination with dexketoprofen) every six hours. Thromboprophylaxis was administered based on the risk of thromboembolic complications.

Duration of observation of the patients was proceed until discharge from the hospital.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Acute Pain Chronic Pain Postoperative Pain Anesthesia Regional Anesthesia Morbidity Anesthesia, Local Anesthesia Complication Hyperalgesia Intraoperative Complications Intraoperative Neurological Injury Intraoperative Injury Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction Neuropathic Pain

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

G1

Intravenous sedation with infiltrative local anaesthesia

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Local infiltrative anaesthesia

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

In prone position, before the skin incision, patients in G1 underwent local infiltrative anaesthesia et the level of incision. The skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscles up to the foramen intervertebral were anesthetized by the surgeon employing forty millilitre solution of Lidocaine 1% with Dexamethasone 0.02% and Epinephrine 0.00018%.

G2

Intravenous sedation with bilateral Erector Spine Plane Block

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Erector spine plane block

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

The transverse vertebral process of the required level of spine was identified using the mobile C-arm X-ray System. When the tip of the 22G needle reached to the transverse vertebral process 3 cm lateral to the spinous process, a solution of 40 millilitres of Lidocaine 1% with Dexamethasone 0.02% and Epinephrine 0.00018% was injected under the erector spinae muscle bilaterally.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Local infiltrative anaesthesia

In prone position, before the skin incision, patients in G1 underwent local infiltrative anaesthesia et the level of incision. The skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscles up to the foramen intervertebral were anesthetized by the surgeon employing forty millilitre solution of Lidocaine 1% with Dexamethasone 0.02% and Epinephrine 0.00018%.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Erector spine plane block

The transverse vertebral process of the required level of spine was identified using the mobile C-arm X-ray System. When the tip of the 22G needle reached to the transverse vertebral process 3 cm lateral to the spinous process, a solution of 40 millilitres of Lidocaine 1% with Dexamethasone 0.02% and Epinephrine 0.00018% was injected under the erector spinae muscle bilaterally.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

Inclusion Criteria: informed consent of the patient to participate in the study, intervertebral hernia that require transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic discectomy, and the absence of known allergies to local anaesthetics.

Exclusion Criteria: refusal to participate in the study both at the beginning of the study and at any stage of the study, physical status according to the ASA classification III and more, age more than 50 years old, body mass index (BMI) more than 30 kg/m2.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

50 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Lviv National Medical University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Maksym Barsa

Doctor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Rivne Oblast State Hospital

Rivne, Rivne Oblast, Ukraine

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Ukraine

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

LNMY-FPGE- ANESTHESIOLOGY-TPED

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

GA + ESP vs. SA + ESP in Lumbar Decompression Surgeries
NCT05444751 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION PHASE3
Erector Spinae Block for Spine Surgery
NCT05417113 TERMINATED PHASE4