ArticleCureus2024
A Randomized Control Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block With Thoracolumbar Interfascial Plane Block for Lumbar Spine Surgeries.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Lumbar spine surgeries often involve significant postoperative pain, necessitating effective analgesic strategies. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and Thoracolumbar interfascial plane block (TLIPB) have emerged as promising regional anesthesia techniques for postoperative pain management. This study compares the efficacy of ultrasound-guided ESPB and TLIPB in providing analgesia following lumbar spine surgeries. Materials and methods A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 60 participants undergoing lumbar spine surgeries. Participants were randomized into ESPB and TLIPB, with 30 patients in each group using computer-generated random numbers with odd numbers allotted to Group A and even numbers allotted to Group B. Primary outcomes included postoperative visual analog pain scores, opioid consumption, and duration of analgesia. Secondary outcomes included time to block effectiveness and incidence of adverse events. Results Preliminary findings revealed that the ESPB group demonstrated significantly higher opioid consumption during the postoperative period, having Mean±SD 8.30±2.89 mg as compared to 6.43±2.85 mg found in the TLIPB group. Patient visual analog scores were higher in the ESPB group compared to the TLIPB group. Time to first analgesic request was more in the ESPB group, having Mean±SD 505.00±167.88 minutes compared to 435.33±181.01 minutes in the TLIPB group, indicating a potentially longer duration of block effectiveness. There were minimal adverse effects, which were similar in both groups. Conclusion Ultrasound-guided ESPB and TLIPB are both effective techniques for postoperative analgesia following lumbar spine surgeries. However, TLIP may offer advantages in terms of reduced opioid consumption after the patient starts complaining of pain, while ESPB provids more duration of analgesia as both the dorsal and ventral rami of spinal nerves are blocked. Further research with larger sample sizes is required to validate these findings and elucidate the optimal regional anesthesia technique for lumbar spine surgeries.
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.