Lumbar Disc HerniationNCT03967314
An mTLIP Block for Analgesia Management After Lumbar Spinal Surgery.
A study testing TLIP block group (group T) and Wound infiltration group (group W) in people with Lumbar Disc Herniation, run by Medipol University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
Pain management is an important issue following lumbar spinal surgery. Wound infiltration is a technique that a local anesthetic solution is infiltrated into the tissues around the surgical area. Modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane (mTLIP) block was described by Ahiskalioglu et al. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Lumbar Disc Herniation
- What is being tested?
- TLIP block group (group T) and Wound infiltration group (group W)
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2019to 30 Apr 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification I-II
- Scheduled for lumbar discectomy/hemilaminectomy surgery under general anesthesia
Who cannot join
- Bleeding diathesis
- Receiving anticoagulant treatment
- Known local anesthetics and opioid allergy
- Infection of the skin at the site of the needle puncture
- Pregnancy or lactation
- Patients who do not accept the procedure
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Istanbul, Bagcilar, 34070
About this study
Official title: A Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Modified-Thoracolumbar Interfacial Plane Block and Wound Infiltration for Postoperative Pain Management in Lumbar Spinal Surgery Patients
Pain management is an important issue following lumbar spinal surgery. Wound infiltration is a technique that a local anesthetic solution is infiltrated into the tissues around the surgical area. Modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane (mTLIP) block was described by Ahiskalioglu et al. In this study, the investigators aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of the US-guided mTLIP block and wound infiltration following lumbar disc surgery.
Read the detailed description
Spinal surgery in the lumbar region is one of the most common surgeries performed for leg and back pain. Postlumbar surgery pain can be severe and may progress to chronic pain during the postoperative period. Therefore, pain management is important after lumbar spinal surgery. Effective postoperative pain management enables early mobilization and shorter durations of hospital stays and may also reduce hospitalization-related complications, such as infections and thromboembolism.
There are a variety of techniques for postoperative pain management. These include intravenous-intramuscular injections, patient-controlled analgesia devices, local anesthetic infiltration, and regional anesthesia. Among these techniques, intramuscular and intravenous (IV) injections may be ineffective in pain management, as they are generally administered after the pain has commenced. In addition, intermittent treatment with analgesic agents may not result in a therapeutic level in the blood.
The most common analgesic agents used postoperatively are opioids. However, parenteral opioids may result in undesirable adverse events, such as nausea, vomiting, itching, sedation, and respiratory depression. Various methods are available to reduce the use of systemic opioids in postoperative pain management, one of which is local anesthetic infiltration (wound infiltration) into the operation site. Several studies reported that wound infiltration can reduce opioid consumption following surgery. Various regional anesthesia techniques can also be used to manage postoperative pain. Such techniques have a high success rate, especially if they are applied with ultrasound (US) guidance, as US improves visualization, thereby reducing potential complications. Previous research reported that US-guided modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane (mTLIP) block after lumbar spinal surgery via a lateral approach provided effective analgesia. No studies seem to have compared the analgesic effectiveness of wound infiltration versus TLIP block. In this study, the investigators compared the analgesic efficacy of the US-guided mTLIP block and wound infiltration following lumbar disc surgery. The primary aim was to compare postoperative opioid consumption. The secondary aim was to evaluate postoperative pain scores and adverse effects of opioids, such as allergic reactions, nausea, and vomiting.
- Conditions
- Lumbar Disc Herniation
- Being tested
- TLIP block group (group T), Wound infiltration group (group W)
- Keywords
- Lumbar spinal surgery, Postoperative pain management, Modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane block
- Medical subject headings
- Intervertebral Disc Displacement
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
TLIP block group (group T)Other
In group T, the block was performed bilaterally under aseptic conditions using the US device with a high-frequency 12-MHz linear US probe. The probe was covered with a sterile sheath and placed vertically at the L3 vertebrae level. After visualizing the hyperechoic shadow of the spinous process and interspinous muscles as an anatomical guide point, the probe was moved forward in a lateral direction to visualize the longissimus and iliocostal muscles. Using the in-plane technique, a 22-G, 50-mm block needle was inserted between the muscles in a medial-to-lateral direction in the interfascial plane. Once the needle tip was placed within the interfacial plane and after careful aspiration to rule out intravascular needle placement, 2 ml of saline was injected to confirm the accuracy of the injection site. A dose of 0.25% bupivacaine (20 ml) was then injected in each side (total 40 ml).
Wound infiltration group (group W)Other
In group W, a dose of 0.5% bupivacaine (20 ml) was injected for wound infiltration into the surgery site.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group T = TLIP block group | Active comparator | After the induction of anesthesia and placement of the patient in a prone position, US-guided mTLIP block was performed via the lateral approach in group T. For postoperative analgesia, a dose of 1 g of paracetamol (IV) was administered routinely, every 8 h. All the patients received fentanyl via a patient-controlled analgesia device. The protocol was a 20 mcg bolus without an infusion dose, 20-min lockout time, and 4-h limit Receives: Other: TLIP block group (group T) |
| Group W = Wound infiltration group | Active comparator | After the induction of anesthesia and placement of the patient in a prone position wound infiltration was performed in group W. For postoperative analgesia, a dose of 1 g of paracetamol (IV) was administered routinely, every 8 h. All the patients received fentanyl via a patient-controlled analgesia device. The protocol was a 20 mcg bolus without an infusion dose, 20-min lockout time, and 4-h limit Receives: Other: Wound infiltration group (group W) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Opioid consumption by the patients at postoperative 24 hours period
Fentanyl using
Measured: Postoperative 24 hours
Secondary outcomes (1)
Postoperative pain scores
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.
Measured: Postoperative 24 hours period
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 May 2019
- Study start1 Jan 2019
- Primary completion30 Apr 2019
- Study completion30 Apr 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Lumbar Disc HerniationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Medipol UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- The patients were aged 18-65 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I-II, and scheduled for lumbar disc surgery under general anesthesia. The patients were randomly divided into two groups using a randomizing computer program: a TLIP block group (group T) and a wound infiltration group (group W), with 30 patients in each group).
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Medipol University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Bahadir Ciftci, Medipol University
- Investigators
- Bahadir Ciftci, Asist.Prof, Principal investigator, Medipol University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03967314
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Medipol Hospital
- Status last verified
- May 2019
- First submitted
- 22 May 2019
- Last updated
- 30 May 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data (IPD) will not be shared
Publications
Ahiskalioglu A, Yayik AM, Alici HA. Ultrasound-guided lateral thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block: Description of new modified technique. J Clin Anesth. 2017 Aug;40:62. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.04.015. No abstract available.
PubMed 28625449Ahiskalioglu A, Alici HA, Selvitopi K, Yayik AM. Ultrasonography-guided modified thoracolumbar interfascial plane block: a new approach. Can J Anaesth. 2017 Jul;64(7):775-776. doi: 10.1007/s12630-017-0851-y. Epub 2017 Feb 27. No abstract available.
PubMed 28243853Gurbet A, Bekar A, Bilgin H, Korfali G, Yilmazlar S, Tercan M. Pre-emptive infiltration of levobupivacaine is superior to at-closure administration in lumbar laminectomy patients. Eur Spine J. 2008 Sep;17(9):1237-41. doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0676-z. Epub 2008 Apr 19.
PubMed 18425538Kjaergaard M, Moiniche S, Olsen KS. Wound infiltration with local anesthetics for post-operative pain relief in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Mar;56(3):282-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02629.x. Epub 2012 Jan 19.
PubMed 22260370
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 May 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Modified-Thoracolumbar Interfacial Plane Block and Wound Infiltration for Postoperative Pain Management in Lumbar Spinal Surgery Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03967314
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Medipol Hospital
- Conditions
- Lumbar Disc Herniation
- Keywords
- Lumbar spinal surgery, Postoperative pain management, Modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane block
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Medipol UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Apr 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 30 May 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Pain management is an important issue following lumbar spinal surgery. Wound infiltration is a technique that a local anesthetic solution is infiltrated into the tissues around the surgical area. Modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane (mTLIP) block was described by Ahiskalioglu et al. In this study, the investigators aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of the US-guided mTLIP block and wound infiltration following lumbar disc surgery.
Detailed description
Spinal surgery in the lumbar region is one of the most common surgeries performed for leg and back pain. Postlumbar surgery pain can be severe and may progress to chronic pain during the postoperative period. Therefore, pain management is important after lumbar spinal surgery. Effective postoperative pain management enables early mobilization and shorter durations of hospital stays and may also reduce hospitalization-related complications, such as infections and thromboembolism.
There are a variety of techniques for postoperative pain management. These include intravenous-intramuscular injections, patient-controlled analgesia devices, local anesthetic infiltration, and regional anesthesia. Among these techniques, intramuscular and intravenous (IV) injections may be ineffective in pain management, as they are generally administered after the pain has commenced. In addition, intermittent treatment with analgesic agents may not result in a therapeutic level in the blood.
The most common analgesic agents used postoperatively are opioids. However, parenteral opioids may result in undesirable adverse events, such as nausea, vomiting, itching, sedation, and respiratory depression. Various methods are available to reduce the use of systemic opioids in postoperative pain management, one of which is local anesthetic infiltration (wound infiltration) into the operation site. Several studies reported that wound infiltration can reduce opioid consumption following surgery. Various regional anesthesia techniques can also be used to manage postoperative pain. Such techniques have a high success rate, especially if they are applied with ultrasound (US) guidance, as US improves visualization, thereby reducing potential complications. Previous research reported that US-guided modified thoracolumbar interfacial plane (mTLIP) block after lumbar spinal surgery via a lateral approach provided effective analgesia. No studies seem to have compared the analgesic effectiveness of wound infiltration versus TLIP block. In this study, the investigators compared the analgesic efficacy of the US-guided mTLIP block and wound infiltration following lumbar disc surgery. The primary aim was to compare postoperative opioid consumption. The secondary aim was to evaluate postoperative pain scores and adverse effects of opioids, such as allergic reactions, nausea, and vomiting.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- The patients were aged 18-65 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I-II, and scheduled for lumbar disc surgery under general anesthesia. The patients were randomly divided into two groups using a randomizing computer program: a TLIP block group (group T) and a wound infiltration group (group W), with 30 patients in each group).
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group T = TLIP block group | Active comparator | Other: TLIP block group (group T)After the induction of anesthesia and placement of the patient in a prone position, US-guided mTLIP block was performed via the lateral approach in group T. For postoperative analgesia, a dose of 1 g of paracetamol (IV) was administered routinely, every 8 h. All the patients received fentanyl via a patient-controlled analgesia device. The protocol was a 20 mcg bolus without an infusion dose, 20-min lockout time, and 4-h limit |
| Group W = Wound infiltration group | Active comparator | Other: Wound infiltration group (group W)After the induction of anesthesia and placement of the patient in a prone position wound infiltration was performed in group W. For postoperative analgesia, a dose of 1 g of paracetamol (IV) was administered routinely, every 8 h. All the patients received fentanyl via a patient-controlled analgesia device. The protocol was a 20 mcg bolus without an infusion dose, 20-min lockout time, and 4-h limit |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification I-II
- Scheduled for lumbar discectomy/hemilaminectomy surgery under general anesthesia
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Bleeding diathesis
- Receiving anticoagulant treatment
- Known local anesthetics and opioid allergy
- Infection of the skin at the site of the needle puncture
- Pregnancy or lactation
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| TLIP block group (group T)In group T, the block was performed bilaterally under aseptic conditions using the US device with a high-frequency 12-MHz linear US probe. The probe was covered with a sterile sheath and placed vertically at the L3 vertebrae level. After visualizing the hyperechoic shadow of the spinous process and interspinous muscles as an anatomical guide point, the probe was moved forward in a lateral direction to visualize the longissimus and iliocostal muscles. Using the in-plane technique, a 22-G, 50-mm block needle was inserted between the muscles in a medial-to-lateral direction in the interfascial plane. Once the needle tip was placed within the interfacial plane and after careful aspiration to rule out intravascular needle placement, 2 ml of saline was injected to confirm the accuracy of the injection site. A dose of 0.25% bupivacaine (20 ml) was then injected in each side (total 40 ml). | Other | Group T = TLIP block group |
| Wound infiltration group (group W)In group W, a dose of 0.5% bupivacaine (20 ml) was injected for wound infiltration into the surgery site. | Other | Group W = Wound infiltration group |
Primary outcome
Opioid consumption by the patients at postoperative 24 hours period
Time frame: Postoperative 24 hours
Fentanyl using
1 secondary outcome
Postoperative pain scores
Time frame: Postoperative 24 hours period
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 May 2019.
- Background: PubMed 28625449Ahiskalioglu A, Yayik AM, Alici HA. Ultrasound-guided lateral thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block: Description of new modified technique. J Clin Anesth. 2017 Aug;40:62. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.04.015. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 28243853Ahiskalioglu A, Alici HA, Selvitopi K, Yayik AM. Ultrasonography-guided modified thoracolumbar interfascial plane block: a new approach. Can J Anaesth. 2017 Jul;64(7):775-776. doi: 10.1007/s12630-017-0851-y. Epub 2017 Feb 27. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 18425538Gurbet A, Bekar A, Bilgin H, Korfali G, Yilmazlar S, Tercan M. Pre-emptive infiltration of levobupivacaine is superior to at-closure administration in lumbar laminectomy patients. Eur Spine J. 2008 Sep;17(9):1237-41. doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0676-z. Epub 2008 Apr 19.
- Background: PubMed 22260370Kjaergaard M, Moiniche S, Olsen KS. Wound infiltration with local anesthetics for post-operative pain relief in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Mar;56(3):282-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02629.x. Epub 2012 Jan 19.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data (IPD) will not be shared
Related trials for Lumbar Disc Herniation
Not yet recruiting
Cortical Surface Functional Changes After Lever Positioning Manipulation for Lumbar Disc Herniation
Lumbar Disc Herniation
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Spinal Mobilization With and Without Clinical Pilates in Patients With Lumbar Disc Herniationc Herniation
Disc Herniation
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Intradiscal Ozone/Oxygen Injection for Treatment of Contained Lumbar Disc Herniation
Lumbar Disc Herniation
Not yet recruiting
Selective Nerve Root Block Versus Sham to Reduce Surgery for Lumbar Disc Herniation
Lumbar Disc Herniation, Lumbar Radiculopathy
Not yet recruiting
H-Reflex-Guided Direction-Sensitive Exercise Versus Standard Extension Exercise for Functional Recovery in Patients With Lumbar Disc Prolapse
Lumber Disc Prolapse
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Bahadir Ciftci, Asist.Prof principal investigator
Medipol University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing TLIP block group (group T) and Wound infiltration group (group W) in people with Lumbar Disc Herniation, run by Medipol University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 May 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Opioid consumption by the patients at postoperative 24 hours period (time frame: Postoperative 24 hours). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03967314, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 May 2019.