ArticleActa neurochirurgica2023
Efficacy of the erector spinae plane block with sedation for unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery and comparison with other anesthetic methods.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy of lumbar erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia management in patients undergoing lumbar unilateral bi-portal endoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Trial
- Total and Hidden Blood Loss in Biportal Endoscopic Versus Tubular-Based Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2026Article
- Enhanced Early Stabilization and Improved Clinical Outcomes by Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Contralateral Facet Fusion Compared With Conventional Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Article
- Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Under Local Anesthesia in Elderly Patients with Medical Comorbidities.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Multimodal Regional Anesthesia Combining Spinal and Erector Spinae Plane Block for Spine Surgery in a High-Risk Patient with Systemic Sclerosis: A Case Report.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2025Article
- Biportal Endoscopic TLIF With an Expandable Cage: Technical Note and Preliminary Results in Terms of Segmental Lordosis Achievement and Disc Height Elevation.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Erector spinae plane block as an anesthesia technique for an emergent thoracotomy; a case report.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Article
- Awake Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression Under Local Anesthesia for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in the Elderly: A Feasibility Study with Technique Note.Clinical interventions in aging · 2024Article
- Fascial plane blocks as the main anesthetic method: A narrative review.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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundErector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a new regional anesthesia. Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) spine surgery, a minimal invasive technique, has been performed under not only general anesthesia (GA) but regional anesthesia including spinal anesthesia (SA). The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of ESPB with sedation for UBE lumbar decompression and compare it with GA and SA.
methodA retrospective age matched case-control study design was performed. Three groups (20 patients in each group) of patients who underwent UBE lumbar decompressions under each anesthetic method (GA, SA, or ESPB) were formed. The total anesthesia time excluding operation time, postoperative analgesia effects, hospital days, and complications related to anesthetic methods were evaluated.
resultsIn the ESPB group, all the operations were performed without change of anesthetic methods and without anesthetic complications. But there were no anesthetic effects in the epidural space, which resulted in additional intravenous fentanyl usage. The mean of time from initiation of anesthesia to completion of surgical preparation was 23.3 ± 4.7 min in the ESPB group, which was shorter than 32.3 ± 10.8 min in the GA (p value = 0.001) or 33.3 ± 6.7 min in the SA group (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients requiring first rescue analgesia within 30 min was 30% in the ESPB group, which was lower than 85% in the GA (p < 0.001), but no significant different with 10% in the SA (p = 0.11). The mean of total hospital days in the ESPB was 3.0 ± 0.8, shorter than 3.7 ± 1.8 in the GA (p = 0.02) or 3.8 ± 1.1 in the SA group (p = 0.01). There was no case of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the ESBB even without prophylactic antiemesis.
conclusionESPB with sedation is a viable anesthetic option for UBE lumbar decompression.
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.