Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
EP064 Efficacy of Erector Spine Plane Block in Two Different Approaches of Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
EP064 Efficacy of Erector Spine Plane Block in Two Different Approaches of Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery
Do you wish to request the book?
EP064 Efficacy of Erector Spine Plane Block in Two Different Approaches of Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
EP064 Efficacy of Erector Spine Plane Block in Two Different Approaches of Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery
2023
Overview
Background and AimsESPB has shown variable efficiency. We evaluated the efficacy of ESPB in elective lumbar spinal fusion surgery patients with different surgical approachesMethodsRetrospectively 45 elective lumbar TPF patients with TLIF or TLIF+ALIF approaches were divided into 2 groups: general anesthesia (GA,n=24), general anesthesia with ESPB (GA+ESPB,n=21). Primary we analyzed efficacy of ESPB in terms of pain intensity in the first 48h. Secondary – fentanyl free patients and opioid consumption in the first 24h postoperatively. Comparative analysis (SPSS®v.28.0).P<0.05.ResultsOut of 45 patients (27 female),21 received GA+ESPB and 24 GA. Average age was 60.3±14.3 years. ESPB was performed in 17 TLIF and in 4 TLIF+ALIF patients. ESPB significantly reduced pain intensity at rest in both approaches 48h after surgery; p<0.05. GA+ESPB when compare with GA increased the number of fentanyl free patients immediately after surgery in TLIF (77%vs.29%;p=0.01) and TLIF+ALIF (82%vs.0%;p=0.004) approaches. For those with ESPB fentanyl infusion was started in 6.8±3.2h (23.5% of TLIF) and 8.9±7.6h (75% of TLIF+ALIF) after surgery. ESPB shortened fentanyl infusion time when compare with GA with mean difference(MD) 3.2±4.2h in TLIF;p=0.045, 6.7±5.3h in TLIF+ALIF;p=0.028. Only in TLIF+ALIF approach, ESPB reduced total fentanyl consumption compared with GA 1.43±0.45mg/24h vs.0.93±0.68mg/24h;p=0.015.ConclusionsESPB reduces pain at rest after lumbar fusion surgery and the number of patients requiring immediate postoperative fentanyl in both approaches, reducing the total fentanyl consumption and duration of infusion. However, application of ESPB not always provide enough analgesia to completely avoid fentanyl administration after surgery in the first 48h.
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd,BMJ Publishing Group LTD
