Pain, PostoperativeNCT04151511
Continuous Thoracic Epidural Versus Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Donar Hepatectomies.
A study testing Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block in people with Pain, Postoperative, run by Shifa Clinical Research Center at 1 site in Pakistan.
Trial summary
Introduction Adult living related donor hepatectomy is associated with pain due to the sub-costal j-shaped incision, rib retraction using Thompson retractor, and diaphragm irritation1. The incidence of severe pain after donor hepatectomy is 11 to 37%2. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 45 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain, Postoperative
- What is being tested?
- Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePakistan
- Study dates
- 19 Oct 2019to Oct 2020
- 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 45 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- 18 - 45 years of age
- A.S.A scores I - II Exclusion Criteria
- Neurological impairment
- Allergy, hypersensitivity or any other contraindications to local anesthetic
- Anatomical variation for block landmarks
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Pakistan1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Hospital
Islamabad, 44000
IRB Shifa, 0092518463075, irbshifa@shifa.com.pk
Dr Muhammad Zubair, MBBS,FCPS
About this study
Official title: "Continuous Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Adult Living Donar Open Hepatectomies."
Introduction Adult living related donor hepatectomy is associated with pain due to the sub-costal j-shaped incision, rib retraction using Thompson retractor, and diaphragm irritation1. The incidence of severe pain after donor hepatectomy is 11 to 37%2. Therefore adequate analgesia is important for optimum perioperative safety profiles and speedy recovery. Poor pain management is associated with risk of atelectasis, respiratory failure, and delayed discharge from the hospital.
so this study is comparison of two technique (Thoracic epidural analgesia vs Erector spinae plane block) to relieve pain.
Read the detailed description
Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is commonly used for pain management in donor hepatectomies. TEA reduces activation of the sympathetic outflow, surgical stress response, and pain-associated tachycardia and hypertension which can cause perioperative myocardial ischemia. TEA decreases stress-induced gastrointestinal disruption, immunosuppression, and decreases postoperative opioid requirement. TEA promotes expiratory intercostal and abdominal muscle tone and facilitates diaphragmatic excursion thus reduce the risks of atelectasis, pneumonia, and respiratory failure. However, TEA has its own drawbacks, e.g. hypotension caused by the inhibition of the sympathetic outflow, which can be associated with the administration of large amounts of crystalloids and colloids. Other complications may include failure to produce analgesia in 20% of patients3, intravascular cannulation leading to local anesthetic toxicity, unintentional dural punctures, paraesthesia, post-operative coagulopathies, epidural abscess, and epidural hematomas resulting in paraplegia1, 3. Considering these merits and demerits, TEA is the widely accepted choice for postoperative analgesia in living related donor hepatectomies1, 3,4, 5.
Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia technique described in 2016 6 for the management of thoracic and abdominal pain. Ultrasound guidance is used to inject a local anesthetic in the interfacial plane between the erector spinae muscle and the associated transverse process of the spine. The mechanism of action is by the spread of local anesthetic anteriorly to the dorsal and ventral rami of the thoracic and abdominal spinal nerves 7. The absence of blood vessels in this vicinity shows the usefulness of this technique in the patients, who are prone to coagulopathies making it safer with lesser expertise, and with less procedural complications 8. The ESPB is an avascular plane block therefore, it results in lower plasma volumes rise due to reduced uptake of the local anesthetic by plasma hence the duration of action of local anesthetic is long. An ESPB at T5 level is sufficient to have a unilateral multi-dermatomes sensory block ranging from T1 to L3 level10 when used as a continuous block. Various case reports demonstrate its efficacy in a wide spectrum of specialities like acute and chronic pain management, thoraco-abdominal surgeries, neuropathic and post-traumatic pain 4, 7, 8,9 , 10. A comparison of continuous epidural versus single shot intrathecal morphine was made and assessed the quality of analgesia by a visual analog scale (VAS) and the additional IV analgesic requirements were 56% in cases of epidural 11 used for sample size calculation.
However, no randomized control study has been performed to compare the efficacy of a continuous ESPB with that of a continuous TEA for living related donor hepatectomies. Thus the aim of this study is to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of continuous ESPB to that of a continuous TEA in patients undergoing adult living donor hepatectomies. Investigators have hypothesized that continuous ESPB would provide better postoperative analgesia with fewer adverse effects. The primary outcome is post-operative pain scores using the visual analog scale (V.A.S) for pain at rest and at maximal inspiration during the post-operative period at PACU, 1, 6, 12, 24 and 48 hours. The secondary outcomes include lung incentive spirometry volumes, the dosage of adjunct nalbuphine used, hypotension, tachycardia, post-operative coagulopathy, early mobilization and discharge from surgical I.C.U (S.I.C.U).
Methodology After approval from the institutional and ethical review board and written informed consent, patients were randomized into either the TEA group or the ESPB group using the sealed enveloped method.
Study design The study will be a single-blinded, prospective, comparative, randomized control trial. The participants will be assigned to one of two groups; Group A will include patients receiving continuous TEA, whilst Group B will include patients receiving continuous ESPB. Both groups will receive their respective intervention after induction with standard general anesthesia.
Blinding is done at the level of assessor. The primary assessor will be blind with the type of technique applied and fill the Proforma according to standard routine with the same drug infusion.
Study population The study will include all adult patients undergoing elective living related donor hepatectomies for liver transplant surgery.
Study setting Study will be conducted in the liver transplant operating rooms of Shifa International Hospital.
Study duration The study duration will be of up to 12 months from the date of approval of the study from the hospital's institutional and ethical review board.
Randomization Randomization will be done by the simple random sampling technique using the sealed envelope method.
Sample Size Sample size was calculated by the WHO sample size calculator and using the following parameters; Level of significance - 5% Power of the test - 80% Proportion of patients requiring opioid in epidural group - 0.56 (ref no.13) Anticipated proportion of patients requiring opioid in ESP group - 0.25 Sample size - 30 patients in each group
Induction of General Anaesthesia In the operating room, the patient will be positioned on the operating table; the standard monitors: non-invasive blood pressure, ECG, pulse oximetry will be applied. A 20 gauge intravenous cannula will be secured on the dorsum of the hand and connected to a maintenance intravenous fluid therapy. The patient will be pre-oxygenated for 3 minutes with oxygen. The patient will be administered injection Ondansetron (0.1mg/kg) and injection Midazolam (0.02mg/kg) intravenous to start with. The patient will be induced with injection Buprenorphine (0.02mg/kg) and injection Propofol (2 mg/kg) mixed with Lidocaine (60 mg), and atracurium (0.5 mg/kg), after which an endotracheal tube will be inserted and mechanical ventilation will be initiated. A radial arterial line and a central venous line will be inserted. Both TEA and ESPB catheters will be placed after induction of general anesthesia for surgery by experienced practitioners in the left lateral decubitus position.
Data Collection Data for the study will be collected by a standardized performa which will record all the required variables of the study. Confidentiality of patient's data will be maintained.
Data Analysis The data will be analyzed by using the IBM SPSS software, version 25.0, for Windows.
- Conditions
- Pain, Postoperative
- Being tested
- Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block
- Medical subject headings
- Pain, Postoperative
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Continuous Erector Spinae Plane BlockProcedure or surgery
- Continuous Thoracic Epidural Thoracic Epidural Analgesia
- Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Continuous Thoracic Epidural | Other | Continuous Thoracic Epidural Analgesia for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Adult Living Donar Open Hepatectomies Receives: Procedure: Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block |
| Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block | Experimental | Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Adult Living Donar Open Hepatectomies Receives: Procedure: Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Post-operative pain scores
Post-operative pain scores using the visual analog scale (V.A.S) 0-10 for pain at rest and at maximal inspiration during the post-operative period at PACU. 0 means no pain and 10 means unbearable pain. Higher scores would be worse outcome. primary outcome post-operative pain scores measured at 6 hours.
Measured: 6 hour
Secondary outcomes (1)
The dosage of adjunct nalbuphine used (mg)
The dosage of adjunct nalbuphine in milligrams (mg) required by the patient at 6 hours post-operatively.
Measured: 6 hour
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Nov 2019
- Study start19 Oct 2019
- Primary completionMar 2020 (estimated)
- Study completionOct 2020 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pain, PostoperativeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Shifa Clinical Research Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Shifa International Hospital
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr Muhammad Zubair, Shifa Clinical Research Center
- Investigators
- Dr Muhammad Zubair, Principal investigator, Shifa International Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04151511
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IRB Ref #165-665-2019
- Status last verified
- Nov 2019
- First submitted
- 22 Oct 2019
- Last updated
- 5 Nov 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Kostov S, Schug SA. Depression and chronic pain. Saudi J Anaesth. 2018 Jul-Sep;12(3):377-378. doi: 10.4103/sja.SJA_69_18. No abstract available.
PubMed 30100833Dewe G, Steyaert A, De Kock M, Lois F, Reding R, Forget P. Pain management in living related adult donor hepatectomy: feasibility of an evidence-based protocol in 100 consecutive donors. BMC Res Notes. 2018 Nov 26;11(1):834. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3941-1.
PubMed 30477577Tzimas P, Prout J, Papadopoulos G, Mallett SV. Epidural anaesthesia and analgesia for liver resection. Anaesthesia. 2013 Jun;68(6):628-35. doi: 10.1111/anae.12191.
PubMed 23662750Chhibber A, Dziak J, Kolano J, Norton JR, Lustik S. Anesthesia care for adult live donor hepatectomy: our experiences with 100 cases. Liver Transpl. 2007 Apr;13(4):537-42. doi: 10.1002/lt.21074.
PubMed 17394151El-Boghdadly K, Pawa A. The erector spinae plane block: plane and simple. Anaesthesia. 2017 Apr;72(4):434-438. doi: 10.1111/anae.13830. Epub 2017 Feb 11. No abstract available.
PubMed 28188611Tsui BCH, Fonseca A, Munshey F, McFadyen G, Caruso TJ. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block: A pooled review of 242 cases. J Clin Anesth. 2019 Mar;53:29-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.09.036. Epub 2018 Oct 3.
PubMed 30292068Forero M, Adhikary SD, Lopez H, Tsui C, Chin KJ. The Erector Spinae Plane Block: A Novel Analgesic Technique in Thoracic Neuropathic Pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):621-7. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000451.
PubMed 27501016Jain K, Jaiswal V, Puri A. Erector spinae plane block: Relatively new block on horizon with a wide spectrum of application - A case series. Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Oct;62(10):809-813. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_263_18.
PubMed 30443066Adhikary SD, Pruett A, Forero M, Thiruvenkatarajan V. Erector spinae plane block as an alternative to epidural analgesia for post-operative analgesia following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: A case study and a literature review on the spread of local anaesthetic in the erector spinae plane. Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Jan;62(1):75-78. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_693_17.
PubMed 29416155Tulgar S, Selvi O, Kapakli MS. Erector Spinae Plane Block for Different Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgeries: Case Series. Case Rep Anesthesiol. 2018 Feb 18;2018:3947281. doi: 10.1155/2018/3947281. eCollection 2018.
PubMed 29670771De Pietri L, Siniscalchi A, Reggiani A, Masetti M, Begliomini B, Gazzi M, Gerunda GE, Pasetto A. The use of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain relief after liver resection: a comparison with epidural analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2006 Apr;102(4):1157-63. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000198567.85040.ce.
PubMed 16551916Zubair M, Adil Khan M, Khan MNA, Iqbal S, Ashraf M, Saleem SA. Comparison of Continuous Thoracic Epidural With Erector Spinae Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Adult Living Donor Hepatectomy. Cureus. 2022 Mar 14;14(3):e23151. doi: 10.7759/cureus.23151. eCollection 2022 Mar.
PubMed 35444875
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Nov 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- "Continuous Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Adult Living Donar Open Hepatectomies."
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04151511
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IRB Ref #165-665-2019
- Conditions
- Pain, Postoperative
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Shifa Clinical Research CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Shifa International Hospital
- Study start
- 19 Oct 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Mar 2020 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Oct 2020 (estimated)
- First posted
- 5 Nov 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.
Introduction Adult living related donor hepatectomy is associated with pain due to the sub-costal j-shaped incision, rib retraction using Thompson retractor, and diaphragm irritation1. The incidence of severe pain after donor hepatectomy is 11 to 37%2. Therefore adequate analgesia is important for optimum perioperative safety profiles and speedy recovery. Poor pain management is associated with risk of atelectasis, respiratory failure, and delayed discharge from the hospital.
so this study is comparison of two technique (Thoracic epidural analgesia vs Erector spinae plane block) to relieve pain.
Detailed description
Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is commonly used for pain management in donor hepatectomies. TEA reduces activation of the sympathetic outflow, surgical stress response, and pain-associated tachycardia and hypertension which can cause perioperative myocardial ischemia. TEA decreases stress-induced gastrointestinal disruption, immunosuppression, and decreases postoperative opioid requirement. TEA promotes expiratory intercostal and abdominal muscle tone and facilitates diaphragmatic excursion thus reduce the risks of atelectasis, pneumonia, and respiratory failure. However, TEA has its own drawbacks, e.g. hypotension caused by the inhibition of the sympathetic outflow, which can be associated with the administration of large amounts of crystalloids and colloids. Other complications may include failure to produce analgesia in 20% of patients3, intravascular cannulation leading to local anesthetic toxicity, unintentional dural punctures, paraesthesia, post-operative coagulopathies, epidural abscess, and epidural hematomas resulting in paraplegia1, 3. Considering these merits and demerits, TEA is the widely accepted choice for postoperative analgesia in living related donor hepatectomies1, 3,4, 5.
Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a novel ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia technique described in 2016 6 for the management of thoracic and abdominal pain. Ultrasound guidance is used to inject a local anesthetic in the interfacial plane between the erector spinae muscle and the associated transverse process of the spine. The mechanism of action is by the spread of local anesthetic anteriorly to the dorsal and ventral rami of the thoracic and abdominal spinal nerves 7. The absence of blood vessels in this vicinity shows the usefulness of this technique in the patients, who are prone to coagulopathies making it safer with lesser expertise, and with less procedural complications 8. The ESPB is an avascular plane block therefore, it results in lower plasma volumes rise due to reduced uptake of the local anesthetic by plasma hence the duration of action of local anesthetic is long. An ESPB at T5 level is sufficient to have a unilateral multi-dermatomes sensory block ranging from T1 to L3 level10 when used as a continuous block. Various case reports demonstrate its efficacy in a wide spectrum of specialities like acute and chronic pain management, thoraco-abdominal surgeries, neuropathic and post-traumatic pain 4, 7, 8,9 , 10. A comparison of continuous epidural versus single shot intrathecal morphine was made and assessed the quality of analgesia by a visual analog scale (VAS) and the additional IV analgesic requirements were 56% in cases of epidural 11 used for sample size calculation.
However, no randomized control study has been performed to compare the efficacy of a continuous ESPB with that of a continuous TEA for living related donor hepatectomies. Thus the aim of this study is to compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of continuous ESPB to that of a continuous TEA in patients undergoing adult living donor hepatectomies. Investigators have hypothesized that continuous ESPB would provide better postoperative analgesia with fewer adverse effects. The primary outcome is post-operative pain scores using the visual analog scale (V.A.S) for pain at rest and at maximal inspiration during the post-operative period at PACU, 1, 6, 12, 24 and 48 hours. The secondary outcomes include lung incentive spirometry volumes, the dosage of adjunct nalbuphine used, hypotension, tachycardia, post-operative coagulopathy, early mobilization and discharge from surgical I.C.U (S.I.C.U).
Methodology After approval from the institutional and ethical review board and written informed consent, patients were randomized into either the TEA group or the ESPB group using the sealed enveloped method.
Study design The study will be a single-blinded, prospective, comparative, randomized control trial. The participants will be assigned to one of two groups; Group A will include patients receiving continuous TEA, whilst Group B will include patients receiving continuous ESPB. Both groups will receive their respective intervention after induction with standard general anesthesia.
Blinding is done at the level of assessor. The primary assessor will be blind with the type of technique applied and fill the Proforma according to standard routine with the same drug infusion.
Study population The study will include all adult patients undergoing elective living related donor hepatectomies for liver transplant surgery.
Study setting Study will be conducted in the liver transplant operating rooms of Shifa International Hospital.
Study duration The study duration will be of up to 12 months from the date of approval of the study from the hospital's institutional and ethical review board.
Randomization Randomization will be done by the simple random sampling technique using the sealed envelope method.
Sample Size Sample size was calculated by the WHO sample size calculator and using the following parameters; Level of significance - 5% Power of the test - 80% Proportion of patients requiring opioid in epidural group - 0.56 (ref no.13) Anticipated proportion of patients requiring opioid in ESP group - 0.25 Sample size - 30 patients in each group
Induction of General Anaesthesia In the operating room, the patient will be positioned on the operating table; the standard monitors: non-invasive blood pressure, ECG, pulse oximetry will be applied. A 20 gauge intravenous cannula will be secured on the dorsum of the hand and connected to a maintenance intravenous fluid therapy. The patient will be pre-oxygenated for 3 minutes with oxygen. The patient will be administered injection Ondansetron (0.1mg/kg) and injection Midazolam (0.02mg/kg) intravenous to start with. The patient will be induced with injection Buprenorphine (0.02mg/kg) and injection Propofol (2 mg/kg) mixed with Lidocaine (60 mg), and atracurium (0.5 mg/kg), after which an endotracheal tube will be inserted and mechanical ventilation will be initiated. A radial arterial line and a central venous line will be inserted. Both TEA and ESPB catheters will be placed after induction of general anesthesia for surgery by experienced practitioners in the left lateral decubitus position.
Data Collection Data for the study will be collected by a standardized performa which will record all the required variables of the study. Confidentiality of patient's data will be maintained.
Data Analysis The data will be analyzed by using the IBM SPSS software, version 25.0, for Windows.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Continuous Thoracic Epidural | Other | Procedure: Continuous Erector Spinae Plane BlockContinuous Thoracic Epidural Analgesia for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Adult Living Donar Open Hepatectomies |
| Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block | Experimental | Procedure: Continuous Erector Spinae Plane BlockContinuous Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Adult Living Donar Open Hepatectomies |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 45 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 18 - 45 years of age
- A.S.A scores I - II Exclusion Criteria
- Neurological impairment
- Allergy, hypersensitivity or any other contraindications to local anesthetic
- Anatomical variation for block landmarks
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block1. Continuous Thoracic Epidural Thoracic Epidural Analgesia 2. Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block | Procedure or surgery | Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block, Continuous Thoracic Epidural |
Primary outcome
Post-operative pain scores
Time frame: 6 hour
Post-operative pain scores using the visual analog scale (V.A.S) 0-10 for pain at rest and at maximal inspiration during the post-operative period at PACU. 0 means no pain and 10 means unbearable pain. Higher scores would be worse outcome. primary outcome post-operative pain scores measured at 6 hours.
1 secondary outcome
The dosage of adjunct nalbuphine used (mg)
Time frame: 6 hour
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Nov 2019.
- Results publication: PubMed 30100833Kostov S, Schug SA. Depression and chronic pain. Saudi J Anaesth. 2018 Jul-Sep;12(3):377-378. doi: 10.4103/sja.SJA_69_18. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 30477577Dewe G, Steyaert A, De Kock M, Lois F, Reding R, Forget P. Pain management in living related adult donor hepatectomy: feasibility of an evidence-based protocol in 100 consecutive donors. BMC Res Notes. 2018 Nov 26;11(1):834. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3941-1.
- Results publication: PubMed 23662750Tzimas P, Prout J, Papadopoulos G, Mallett SV. Epidural anaesthesia and analgesia for liver resection. Anaesthesia. 2013 Jun;68(6):628-35. doi: 10.1111/anae.12191.
- Results publication: PubMed 17394151Chhibber A, Dziak J, Kolano J, Norton JR, Lustik S. Anesthesia care for adult live donor hepatectomy: our experiences with 100 cases. Liver Transpl. 2007 Apr;13(4):537-42. doi: 10.1002/lt.21074.
- Results publication: PubMed 28188611El-Boghdadly K, Pawa A. The erector spinae plane block: plane and simple. Anaesthesia. 2017 Apr;72(4):434-438. doi: 10.1111/anae.13830. Epub 2017 Feb 11. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 30292068Tsui BCH, Fonseca A, Munshey F, McFadyen G, Caruso TJ. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block: A pooled review of 242 cases. J Clin Anesth. 2019 Mar;53:29-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.09.036. Epub 2018 Oct 3.
- Results publication: PubMed 27501016Forero M, Adhikary SD, Lopez H, Tsui C, Chin KJ. The Erector Spinae Plane Block: A Novel Analgesic Technique in Thoracic Neuropathic Pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):621-7. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000451.
- Results publication: PubMed 30443066Jain K, Jaiswal V, Puri A. Erector spinae plane block: Relatively new block on horizon with a wide spectrum of application - A case series. Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Oct;62(10):809-813. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_263_18.
- Results publication: PubMed 29416155Adhikary SD, Pruett A, Forero M, Thiruvenkatarajan V. Erector spinae plane block as an alternative to epidural analgesia for post-operative analgesia following video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: A case study and a literature review on the spread of local anaesthetic in the erector spinae plane. Indian J Anaesth. 2018 Jan;62(1):75-78. doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_693_17.
- Results publication: PubMed 29670771Tulgar S, Selvi O, Kapakli MS. Erector Spinae Plane Block for Different Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgeries: Case Series. Case Rep Anesthesiol. 2018 Feb 18;2018:3947281. doi: 10.1155/2018/3947281. eCollection 2018.
- Results publication: PubMed 16551916De Pietri L, Siniscalchi A, Reggiani A, Masetti M, Begliomini B, Gazzi M, Gerunda GE, Pasetto A. The use of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain relief after liver resection: a comparison with epidural analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2006 Apr;102(4):1157-63. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000198567.85040.ce.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35444875Zubair M, Adil Khan M, Khan MNA, Iqbal S, Ashraf M, Saleem SA. Comparison of Continuous Thoracic Epidural With Erector Spinae Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Adult Living Donor Hepatectomy. Cureus. 2022 Mar 14;14(3):e23151. doi: 10.7759/cureus.23151. eCollection 2022 Mar.
Related trials for Pain, Postoperative
RecruitingPhase 4
Anrikefon-based Patient-controlled Intravenous Analgesia Following Laparoscopic Surgery
Laparoscopic Surgery, Visceral Pain, Postoperative
Recruiting
NOL Guided Analgesia During Elective Laparoscopic Surgery Under General Anesthesia
Intraoperative Analgesia
Recruiting
Aescin-Based Herbal Extract (Reparil) for Postoperative Sequelae After Mandibular Third Molar Surgery
Postoperative Pain, Facial Swelling
Recruiting
Effect of Ultrasonic and Diode Laser Activated Irrigation on Postoperative Pain Following Root Canal Treatment
Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis and Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis
Not yet recruiting
Opioid Reduction and Enhanced Recovery in Orthopaedic Surgery (OREOS)-Knee
Knee Arthroplasty, Total, Partial Knee Arthroplasty
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.
Dr Muhammad Zubair principal investigator
Shifa International Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block in people with Pain, Postoperative, run by Shifa Clinical Research Center at 1 site in Pakistan.
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 5 inclusion and 0 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Nov 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 Pakistan. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Dr Muhammad Zubair (00923335317056, zubair831@hotmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Post-operative pain scores (time frame: 6 hour). 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 NCT04151511, which also lists 12 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 5 Nov 2019.