The Efficacy and Safety of Landmark-guided Compared to Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Techniques for Analgesia in Female Patients After Breast Surgery.

Ultrasound guidance has established itself as the norm for regional anesthesia procedures, enabling live visualization of anatomical structures and enhancing the precision and safety of needle insertion. Conversely, the blind technique relies on anatomical landmarks and the ability to palpate to direct needle insertion. Although the blind technique might provide simplicity and efficiency, uncertainties persist concerning its precision and possible associated risks. As the popularity of the ESPB increases, a relevant query emerges: Should it be conducted with ultrasound guidance or through a non-guided technique? This study was designed to validate the efficacy and safety of a landmark-guided ESPB technique compared to an ultrasound-guided ESPB technique for analgesia in breast surgery. The hypothesis was that the ultrasound and anatomical landmark techniques for ESPB would provide equivalent analgesia. The study's primary objective was to compare the success rate of both techniques. The secondary objectives were to compare the dermatomal block spread, analgesic effectiveness, and technique-related complications.

Inclusion criteria

• Patients aged 18 years or older.
• Patients had an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical score of I-II.
• Patients undergoing unilateral elective breast surgery.

Exclusion criteria

• Patients had a contraindication to an ESPB (including coagulopathy, recent anticoagulant medication usage, or infection at the needle puncture site).
• Patients had a history of opioid addiction, preoperative opioid use, and allergies to study medications.
• Obesity (body mass index exceeding 35 kg/m²).
• If the placement of ESPB was not completed due to technique difficulties.
• Patients who expressed a lack of willingness to participate in the study were not considered eligible for participation.