ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2022
Surgeon-Placed Erector Spinae Plane Catheters for Multilevel Lumbar Spine Fusion: Technique and Outcomes Compared With Single-Shot Blocks.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical vs ultrasound-guided lumbar erector spinae plane block for pain management following lumbar spinal fusion surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Trial
- Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block in Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Opioid-Sparing and Postoperative Pain Outcomes.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Anesthetic management of a patient with spinal muscular atrophy type II for scoliosis surgery: a case report.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Article
- Letter to the editor concerning "The efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) versus freehand ESPB in postoperative pain management after lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a randomized, non-inferiority trial" by A. Mirkheshti et al. (Eur Spine J [2024]: doi:10.1007/s00586-023-08101-9).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Article
- Answer to the Letter to the Editor of Raghuraman M Sethuraman concerning "The efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) versus freehand ESPB in postoperative pain management after lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a randomized, non-inferiority trial" by A. Mirkheshti et al. (Eur Spine J [2024]: doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-08101-9).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Article
- Ultrasound‑guided erector spinae plane block in posterior lumbar surgery (Review).Biomedical reports · 2024Review
- The Efficacy of Erector Spinae Plane Block for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2023Article
- Utility of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Blocks for Postoperative Pain Management Following Thoracolumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Erector spinae plane block in spine surgeries: Single-level versus bi-level, single-shot versus continuous catheter technique.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative pain management of multilevel lumbar fusion remains challenging. There are few reports of opioid-sparing regional analgesia for spine surgery. We present a novel method for surgeon-placed erector spinae plane (ESP) catheters for multilevel lumbar spine fusion and compare pain- and opioid-related outcomes in a matched cohort who received anesthesiologist-placed ESP blocks.
methodsA retrospective matched pilot study of 18 patients: 6 received intraoperative, bilateral ESP catheters. Tunneled catheters were placed under the intact ESP at the proximal end of the incision. Continuous infusions of ropivacaine (0.2%) were started in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) after emergence from anesthesia and maintained for 48 hours. Catheter patients were matched 1:2 with 12 patients who received preincision single-shot ESP blocks administered by an anesthesiologist, according to age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, body mass index, and number of spinal levels fused. All patients were provided opioid intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA). Numeric rating scale pain scores (NRS, 0-10), length of stay (LOS), opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalents, mg), opioid side effects, and complications (motor weakness, local anesthetic toxicity, infection, technical issues, and failure), were compared in the PACU and on the nursing floor.
resultsOnly 1/6 patients with ESP catheter used opioid IV-PCA, compared with 11/12 who received ESP blocks. There were no differences in total opioid consumption (catheters: 135 ± 141 mg; blocks: 183 ± 112 mg;
conclusionSurgeon-placed ESP catheters represent a simple technique to provide regional analgesia, particularly in centers lacking regional anesthesiology services. Risks, benefits, and efficacy compared to other techniques require prospective study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.