Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Istanbul, Bagcilar, 34070, Turkey (Türkiye)
NCT Number: NCT03960736
Video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) has recently been evaluated as the standard surgical procedure for lung surgery. Although VATS is less painful than thoracotomy, patients may feel severe pain during the first hours at postoperative period. Analgesia management is very important for these patients in postoperative period since insufficient analgesia can cause pulmonary complications such as atelectasis, pneumonia and increased oxygen consumption. The ultrasound (US) guided erector spina plane (ESP) block is a novel interfacial plan block defined by Forero et al. at 2016. ESP block provides thoracic analgesia at T5 level and abdominal analgesia at T7-9 level. Visualization of sonoanatomy with US is easy, and the spread of local anesthesic agents can be easily seen under the erector spinae muscle (12). Thus, analgesia occurs in several dermatomes with cephalad-caudad way. In the literature, there is not still any randomized study evaluating ESP block efficiency for postoperative analgesia management after VATS. The aim of this study is to compare US-guided continuous ESP block and TEA for postoperative analgesia management after VATS.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–65 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Istanbul, Bagcilar, 34070, Turkey (Türkiye)
Video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) has recently been evaluated as the standard surgical procedure for lung surgery. The advantages of VATS procedures compared with open thoracotomy are rapid recovery, short hospital stay and low complication risk. Although VATS is less painful than thoracotomy, patients may feel severe pain during the first hours at postoperative period. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) which is the gold standard analgesic technique after thoracotomy, is generally used for analgesia management after VATS. However, since the surgical technique and trauma between open surgery and VATS are different, the question of what should be the gold standard for analgesia management after VATS is a topic of discussion. Especially due to the difficult administration and adverse effect profile of TEA, the opinion of minimally invasive surgical procedures, requiring less invasive analgesic techniques is supported. Analgesia management is very important for these patients in postoperative period since insufficient analgesia can cause pulmonary complications such as atelectasis, pneumonia and increased oxygen consumption.
The ultrasound (US) guided erector spina plane (ESP) block is a novel interfacial plan block defined by Forero et al. at 2016. ESP block provides thoracic analgesia at T5 level and abdominal analgesia at T7-9 level. The ESP block contains a local anesthetic injection into the deep fascia of erector spinae. This area is away from the pleural and neurological structures and thus minimizes the risk of complications due to injury. Visualization of sonoanatomy with US is easy, and the spread of local anesthesic agents can be easily seen under the erector spinae muscle. Thus, analgesia occurs in several dermatomes with cephalad-caudad way. Cadaveric studies have shown that the injection spreads to the ventral and dorsal roots of the spinal nerves and creates sensory blockade in both posterior and anterolateral thorax. In the literature, it has been reported that ESP block provides effective analgesia after open heart surgery, breast surgery and ventral hernia repair in randomized controlled studies about ESP block efficiency for postoperative analgesia management. In some case series and case reports it has been reported that ESP block provides effective analgesia after thoracotomy and VATS. Furthermore, it has been reported that it provides effective analgesia in chronic and persistant pain syndromes of thorax.
The aim of this study is to compare US-guided continuous ESP block and TEA for postoperative analgesia management after VATS. The primary aim is to compare perioperative and postoperative opioid consumption and the secondary aim is to evaluate postoperative pain scores (VAS), adverse effects related with opioids (allergic reaction, nausea, vomiting), complications due to blocks (pneumothorax, hematoma), and the time period and number of attempt for blocks.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
US probe will be placed longitudinally 2-3 cm lateral to the T5 transvers process. From superior to inferior, three muscles will be visualized on the hyperechoic transverse process; trapezius (upper), rhomboideus major (middle), erector spinae (lower). The block needle will be inserted cranio caudal direction and then for correction of the needle 5 ml saline will be injected deep into the erector spina muscle fascia. Following confirmation of the correct position 20G catheter will be inserted 5 cm in caudal direction. 20 ml %0.25 bupivacaine will be administered for block.
Local infiltration with 2% of lidocaine under the skin, in T4/T5 intervertebral space will be administered. An 18 G Tuohy needle will be inserted at T4/T5 intervertebral space to identify epidural space using the loss of resistance technique. 20G catheter will be inserted 3-4 cm in caudal direction in the epidural space. Bolus dose of 0.125% bupivacaine 10 ml will be administered through the catheter after the negative aspiration for blood or cerebrospinal fluid
Time frame: Postoperative 24 hours
Postoperative pain assessment will be performed using the VAS score (0 = no pain, 10 = the most severe pain felt). The VAS scores at rest and during cough will be recorded at postoperative 0, 2, 4, 8, 16,and 24 hours.
Time frame: Postoperative 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hours.
Postoperative rescue analgesia need will be evaluated at postoperative 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 24 hours.
Medipol University
Other
COMPARISON OF CONTINUOUS ERECTOR SPINAE PLANE BLOCK AND THORACIC EPIDURAL ANALGESIA FOR POSTOPERATİVE ANALGESIA MANAGEMENT FOLLOWING VIDEO ASSISTED THORACIC SURGERY
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07552779
COVID-19, COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019)
Brussels, Bruxelles-capitale, Région de, Belgium
View Trial DetailsNCT04776447
Bronchial Neoplasms, Carcinoma Bronchiogenic Stage III
Alicante, Spain
View Trial DetailsNCT06728709
Gynecologic Cancer, Lung Diseases
Cairo, Cairo Governorate, Egypt
View Trial DetailsNCT03250897
Lung Diseases, Respiratory Tract Diseases
Rennes, France
View Trial Details