ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2026
Comparison of sacral erector spinae plane block and caudal epidural block for postoperative analgesia in pediatric hypospadias surgery: a prospective observational study.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07286786 (Comparison of Analgesic Efficacy of Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Block and Caudal Epidural Block in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Hypospadias Surgery), 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 Analgesic Efficacy of Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Block and Caudal Epidural Block in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Hypospadias Surgery
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective postoperative analgesia is essential in pediatric urogenital surgery to reduce stress responses and opioid exposure. Caudal epidural block is widely used for hypospadias repair; however, its duration may be limited and it is associated with neuraxial-related concerns. Sacral erector spinae plane (ESP) block has recently emerged as a potential alternative regional technique. This study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of sacral ESP block and caudal epidural block in children undergoing hypospadias surgery.
methodsThis prospective, comparative observational study included 86 pediatric patients (aged 1-7 years, ASA I-II) undergoing elective hypospadias repair. Patients were allocated to receive either ultrasound-guided sacral ESP block or landmark-based caudal epidural block with 0.5 mL·kg⁻
resultsEighty-six patients were analyzed (43 per group), with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. Median FLACC scores were significantly lower in the sacral ESP group at all postoperative time points, including the primary endpoint at 12 h (0 [0-0] vs. 1 [0-2], p < 0.001). Time to first rescue analgesic was significantly longer in the sacral ESP group (mean 22.7 h, 95% CI 21.5-23.9) compared with the caudal group (13.7 h, 95% CI 10.9-16.6; p < 0.001). The median number of postoperative analgesic administrations was lower in the sacral ESP group (0 [0-0] vs. 1 [0-1], p < 0.001). No block-related complications were observed in either group.
conclusionsUltrasound-guided sacral erector spinae plane block was associated with lower postoperative pain scores, prolonged time to rescue analgesia, and reduced analgesic consumption compared with caudal epidural block in pediatric patients undergoing hypospadias surgery. Sacral ESP block may represent a useful alternative to caudal epidural block; however, randomized controlled studies are required to confirm these findings.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT07286786.
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.