Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2026
Comparison of erector spinae plane block and paravertebral block on quality of recovery-15 after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a prospective randomized study : Regional techniques and quality of recovery after thoracoscopic surgery.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06558331 (Comparison of the Effects of ESP Block and Paravertebral Block on the Quality of Postoperative Recovery), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of the Effects of ESP Block and Paravertebral Block on the Quality of Postoperative Recovery (QoR-15T) in Patients Undergoing Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS)
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
backgroundPostoperative pain remains a significant concern after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), potentially impairing recovery quality. Thoracic erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and paravertebral block (PVB) are widely used regional anesthesia techniques integrated into multimodal analgesia protocols. This study compared their effects on postoperative recovery quality and pain control.
methodsIn this prospective randomized study, 60 adult patients undergoing elective VATS were allocated to receive either ESPB (n = 30) or PVB (n = 30) at the T4-T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The primary outcome was postoperative quality of recovery assessed by the validated Turkish version of the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) questionnaire. Pain intensity was measured using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Additional outcomes included opioid consumption, length of hospital stay (LOS), rescue analgesia requirement, and complications.
resultsPreoperative QoR-15 scores were comparable between groups. At 24 h postoperatively, QoR-15 scores were significantly higher in Group PVB than in Group ESPB (139.40 ± 7.38 vs. 134.90 ± 8.70; p = 0.024; Cohen's d = 0.56), although the between-group difference did not reach the minimal clinically important difference. The decline in QoR-15 from baseline was greater in Group ESPB (- 11.50 [- 15.00 to - 8.00] vs. -7.50 [- 10.00 to - 4.00]; p = 0.001; r = 0.41). Longitudinal analysis of postoperative NRS scores demonstrated a significant group × time interaction (p = 0.001). Pain scores at postoperative 0 h were significantly lower in Group PVB (p = 0.002), whereas no significant between-group differences were observed at later time points (2-24 h). Opioid consumption, LOS, rescue analgesia requirements, and complication rates were comparable between groups (p > 0.05).
conclusionPVB was associated with lower early postoperative pain scores and higher QoR-15 scores at 24 h compared with ESPB; however, the between-group difference in QoR-15 was below the minimal clinically important difference. Overall opioid consumption and clinical outcomes were comparable. Further multicenter studies are needed to determine whether these findings translate into clinically meaningful long-term benefits.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (ID NCT06558331). The clinical trial was prospectively registered on August 14, 2024.
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.