Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
Comparative efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus wound infiltration for postoperative analgesia in instrumented lumbar spinal surgeries.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06567964 (Comparative Efficacy of Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Wound Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia in Instrumented Lumbar Spinal Surgeries), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Comparative Efficacy of Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Wound Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia in Instrumented Lumbar Spinal Surgeries
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine for retrolaminar block for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Comparison of quadro-iliac plane block and erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia management after single level lumbar discectomy surgery: a randomized, double-blind, controlled, prospective, multicenter study.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Trial
- Comparison of liposomal bupivacaine erector spinae plane block versus wound infiltration for postoperative analgesia and quality of recovery in lumbar fusion surgery: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of medical research · 2025Trial
- Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine thoracic paravertebral block for thoracoscopic atrial septal defect repair: analgesic efficacy and cardiac biomarker outcomes in a single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized trial.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Comparison of local anaesthetic versus saline erector spinae plane block for perioperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain in open posterior spine surgeries - A randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study compared the efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and wound infiltration (WI) for postoperative analgesia in patients who underwent lumbar spinal surgery with instrumentation.
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, 80 patients were divided into two groups: ESPB (n = 40) and WI (n = 40). Postoperative pain intensity was assessed via the visual analog scale (VAS) at multiple time points within 24 h. Additionally, opioid consumption, time to first rescue analgesia, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and patient satisfaction were evaluated.
resultsBoth ESPB and WI provided effective postoperative pain management, with no significant differences in VAS scores. However, the ESPB group demonstrated a significantly longer duration of analgesia, a shorter time to first rescue analgesia, and lower total tramadol consumption (50 ± 60 mg vs. 100 ± 75 mg; p = 0.010) than did the WI group. Furthermore, a trend toward reduced PONV incidence was observed in the ESPB group, likely due to its opioid-sparing effect.
conclusionWhile both ESPB and WI provided effective postoperative pain management, ESPB demonstrated a distinct advantage by offering a longer duration of analgesia and significantly reducing opioid consumption. These findings suggest that ESPB is more effective than WI for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spinal surgeries, providing prolonged pain relief and improving patient outcomes. Further studies are warranted to explore its long-term benefits and cost-effectiveness.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.govPRS: NCT06567964 Date: 08/21/2024 Retrospectively registered.
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.