Optimizing Post-Thoracotomy Pain Management: Comparing Erector Spinae vs. Paravertebral Block in Thoracotomy Patients
NCT ID: NCT06964698
Last Updated: 2025-05-09
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
60 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2022-06-01
2023-02-01
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.
Comparison of the Effect of Preemptive and Post-operative Erector Spina Plane Block on Intraoperative Opioid Consumption and Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Who Will Undergo Elective Thoracotomy Surgery, Guided by the Nociception Level Index (NoL)
NCT05944523
Comparison of Efficacy of Paravertebral and Epidural Analgesia After Videothoracoscopic Lung Lobectomy
NCT02040662
Comparison of Pain Relief Efficacy of Epidural Analgesia and Erector Spinae Plane Block Before Thoracotomy Surgery
NCT06011863
Perioperative Thoracotomy Analgesia; Different Analgesic Modalities
NCT04264689
Comparison of Continuous Erector Spina Plane Block With Intercostal Block in Acute and Chronic Pain Control After Thoracotomy
NCT04309630
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Patient Population and Randomization Adult patients aged 18-70 years who underwent unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy approach under elective conditions between June 1, 2022, and December 1, 2022, were included in the study. Informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to enrollment. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients classified as ASA II-III, no history of previous thoracotomy, no chronic pain or analgesic dependence, and adequate preoperative cooperation. The exclusion criteria included patients with known drug allergies, chronic analgesic use, or preexisting neuropathic conditions.
Randomization was performed via a computer-generated sequence to ensure the true random allocation of patients into either the ESPB or the PVB group. The sequence was concealed via sealed opaque envelopes, which were opened by the attending anesthesiologist just before block administration. No stratification was applied; however, group assignment was conducted to ensure an equal distribution of patients by sex, age, and ASA status. The anesthesiologist monitoring postoperative pain was blinded to the type of block administered.
Preoperative anaesthesia preparation and block protocols All patients received standard ASA monitoring, including invasive blood pressure measurement. All blocks were performed by the same anesthesiologist (O.A.), who had more than 7 years of experience in ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia.
Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) Protocol For ESPB, the patient was positioned in a seated posture, and under sterile conditions, a 22G, 80 mm Stimuplex® D block needle (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was inserted between the T6 and T7 transverse processes and the erector spinae muscle via ultrasound guidance (Fujifilm Arietta 65, Tokyo, Japan). The T6-T7 level was chosen on the basis of its proximity to the thoracic surgical site, allowing for optimal coverage of the thoracic dermatomes. Following negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected via hydrodissection to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered.
Paravertebral block (PVB) protocol For the PVB, the patient was seated, and a 22G block needle was inserted into the paravertebral space at the T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The T5 level was selected to provide direct analgesia to the thoracic paravertebral space, which is known to block multiple thoracic nerves. After negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered following hydrodissection.
Anaesthesia Protocol Premedication was achieved with 2 mg intravenous midazolam, which was administered prior to the block performance. General anaesthesia induction was achieved with 2 mcg/kg fentanyl and 1.5-3 mg/kg propofol, with a target bispectral index (BIS) between 40 and 60. Neuromuscular blockade was induced via 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium, and maintenance of anaesthesia was achieved via sevoflurane (1%-2%) and remifentanil (0.05--0.2 mcg/kg/min) in a 50% oxygen/air mixture. All patients underwent orotracheal intubation with a double-lumen tube appropriate for their body height and surgical side, and mechanical ventilation parameters were standardized across all patients. A standard posterolateral thoracotomy was performed through the fifth intercostal space to provide surgical access. For optimal postoperative drainage and lung re-expansion, a 28 Fr chest tube was inserted through the sixth intercostal space, one level below the thoracotomy incision. All operations were carried out by the same team.
At the conclusion of the surgery, patients were administered 1 g of paracetamol and 100 mg of tramadol intravenously, followed by decurarization with 2-4 mg/kg sugammadex. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device (BodyGuard 595) with a basal infusion of 2.5 mL/h of tramadol (500 mg tramadol in 125 mL of 0.9% NaCl) was used for postoperative analgesia (intermittent bolus dose of 5 mL - lock time 30 min). Morphine (0.1 mg/kg) was used as a rescue analgesic if the NRS score exceeded 4 out of 10.
Outcome Measurements The primary outcome was postoperative pain, which was assessed via the NRS and the Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. Pain levels were also assessed at 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively, with phone calls for follow-up. Although phone assessments may introduce bias due to the subjective nature of self-reported pain levels, this method was chosen to maintain follow-up consistency across all patients. To mitigate this limitation, the same standardized questionnaire was used for all phone assessments, and patients were instructed to report their pain levels accurately.
The secondary outcomes included the incidence of PTPS at 2 months, the total consumption of opioids via the PCA device, the number of requests for rescue analgesia, and the incidence of complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage. Additionally, demographic characteristics, intraoperative hemodynamic data, and surgical duration were recorded.
The secondary outcomes included the incidence of PTPS at 2 months; the total consumption of opioids via the PCA device at 24 hours postoperatively; the number of requests for rescue analgesia within the first 24 hours postoperatively; and the incidence of complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage. Hemodynamic variables were assessed with measurements taken at the following predefined times: preoperatively, end of induction, time of skin incision, 30th, 60th, 90th and 120th minute of block and end of surgery. Additionally, demographic characteristics, intraoperative hemodynamic data, and surgical duration were recorded.
Statistical analysis A power analysis was conducted to determine the required sample size, with an alpha of 0.05 and beta of 0.1, expecting a minimum 3 mg difference in 24-hour opioid consumption between the groups (doi: 10.7759/cureus.59459). Based on an estimated effect size of Cohen's d ≈ 0.9, a minimum of 60 patients (30 per group) were included to achieve a power of 90%. A total of 64 patients were enrolled to account for potential attrition. The data were analysed via SPSS (Mac OS, version 27.0). The normality of the data was assessed with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Normally distributed data were analyzed using independent t-tests, while non-normally distributed data were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Continuous variables are presented as the means ± standard deviations, and categorical variables are presented as frequencies and percentages. Statistical significance was determined by p values \< 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.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Paravertebral Block (PVB)
Includes patients with paravertebral block as analgesic For the PVB, the patient was seated, and a 22G block needle was inserted into the paravertebral space at the T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The T5 level was selected to provide direct analgesia to the thoracic paravertebral space, which is known to block multiple thoracic nerves. After negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered following hydrodissection.
No interventions assigned to this group
Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB)
Includes patients with Erector Spinae Plane Block as analgesic. For ESPB, the patient was positioned in a seated posture, and under sterile conditions, a 22G, 80 mm Stimuplex® D block needle (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was inserted between the T6 and T7 transverse processes and the erector spinae muscle via ultrasound guidance (Fujifilm Arietta 65, Tokyo, Japan). The T6-T7 level was chosen on the basis of its proximity to the thoracic surgical site, allowing for optimal coverage of the thoracic dermatomes. Following negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected via hydrodissection to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patients classified as ASA II-III,
* No history of previous thoracotomy,
* No chronic pain or analgesic dependence,
* Adequate preoperative cooperation.
Exclusion Criteria
* Chronic analgesic use
* Preexisting neuropathic conditions.
18 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City Hospital
OTHER_GOV
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Ozal Adiyeke
specialist, MD
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Başakşehir Çam Ve Sakura Şehir Hastanesi
Istanbul, Basaksehir, Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
KAEK.2022.05.155
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.