Inguinal HerniaTAPESPNCT04750512
Comparing Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) and Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) Block in Inguinal Hernia
A study testing ESP block and TAP block in people with Inguinal Hernia and Postoperative Pain, run by Ghielmini Enea at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
The Erectore Spinae Plane Block (ESP Block) is a recently described technique for regional anesthesia that has shown promising results in the treatment of pain after thoracic surgery. It involves the injection of local anesthetic behind the musculature of the back. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Inguinal Hernia, Postoperative Pain, Anesthesia, Local
- What is being tested?
- ESP block and TAP block
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 11 Jan 2021to 31 May 2022
- 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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Informed Consent as documented by signature
- Patients over 18 years of age
- Planned elective unilateral or bilateral robot-assisted TAPP hernia repair, with mesh placement
Who cannot join
- Contraindications to ropivacaine or opioids, e.g. known hypersensitivity or allergy
- Infections at the injection site
- Coagulopathies or ongoing anticoagulant therapy
- Concomitant surgery other than inguinal or umbilical hernia repair
- Pre-operative chronic narcotic usage
- Known chronic pain syndrome
Show all 11Show fewer
- Prior complex abdominal wall reconstruction
- Frail patients for whom a prolonged sedation can be detrimental
- Women who are pregnant
- Known or suspected non-compliance, drug or alcohol abuse
- Inability to consent or follow the procedures of the study, e.g. due to language problems, psychological disorders, dementia, etc. of the participant
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Comparing Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) and Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) Block Analgesic Effect After Robotic TAPP Abdominal Hernia Repair: a Single Center, Randomized, Triple-blind, Controlled Trial
The Erectore Spinae Plane Block (ESP Block) is a recently described technique for regional anesthesia that has shown promising results in the treatment of pain after thoracic surgery. It involves the injection of local anesthetic behind the musculature of the back.
The investigators intend to compare this technique with a more standardized one, the TAP Block, which involves injection of anesthetic behind the musculature of the abdomen.
Read more
50 patients undergoing robotic inguinal hernia repair under general anesthesia will be randomly selected to receive, in addition to general anesthesia, either the ESP block or the TAP block. Patients receiving an ESP Block will also receive an injection of saline solution in the TAP injection site, and the other way around. This will prevent preconceived ideas on either technique to influence the evaluationso of the effect.
Pain scores and consumption of pain medication will be recorded during the 24 hours following the operation to compare the effect of the two techniques.
Read the detailed description
In the recent era of increased awareness towards the risks and complications of opioid treatment, pain management after common surgical interventions by the means of regional anesthesia is of renewed interest for both clinical and logistic reasons, as it is known that good pain management reduces complications and cost associated to surgery.
Regional and local anesthetic techniques after inguinal hernia surgery have been the topic of multiple studies, comparing various infiltrative methods, including wound infiltration, port site infiltration, iliohypogastric and ilioinguinal nerve block, paravertebral and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and epidural analgesia. Most methods investigate pain treatment in the setting of open surgery. The progressive evolution towards laparoscopic and robot-assisted methods changes the mechanisms of surgical pain and, with it, the rational for the choice of the analgesic technique adopted. The transversus abdominis plane (TAP) has become a widely used technique and has been demonstrated to be associated to a mild opioid sparing effect, but with inconsistent results.
The erector spinae plane block is a promising technique, recently described and used especially in thoracic surgery. Multiple case reports and studies in pediatrics report it to be a safe and effective method for abdominal surgery as well, but no prospective randomized trials were published to date in the adult population, particularly with regard to laparoscopic or robotic hernia repair. A prospective comparison between the two techniques is therefore needed in this specific context.
Hypothesis and primary objective:
The investigators hypothesize the superiority of the ESP-block to the TAP-block with respect to post-operative pain control after abdominal surgery, leading to a reduction in reserve analgesic consumption.
Our objective is to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of ESP block versus TAP block in patients undergoing robot-assisted TAPP inguinal hernia repair.
Primary and secondary endpoints:
Primary Endpoint:
- The highest VAS score reported between end of sedation and 6 hours after surgery or discharge of the patient, whichever comes first Secondary Endpoints
- Time to first rescue analgesic
- Total dose of rescue opioids (morphine equiavalents) in the first 24 hours after surgery
- Time of first walk after surgery
- Need for anti-nausea medication (dosage, doses and time points)
- Episodes of vomiting
- Episodes of urinary retention
- Patient's satisfaction (measured on the validated LPPS questionnaire for the perioperative patients' satisfaction )
- Length of hospital stay
Study design This is a single center, prospective, randomized, placebo-blinded, controlled superiority trial in 2 parallel arms comparing the efficacy and safety of the ESP Block and the TAP block on patients undergoing elective robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair.
Follow up will consist in the hospitalization period plus one telephone consultation at 24 hours after hospitalization.
Methods of minimizing bias:
Randomisation - Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio by a computer generated random number sequence through the RedCap software system.
Blinding procedures
According to the randomization arm patients will receive:
- sham US-guided ESP block + US-guided TAP block before laparoscopic hernia repair
- US-guided ESP block + sham US-guided TAP block before laparoscopic hernia repair Allocation will take place immediately before the intervention by the means of access to centralized, real-time allocation through a computer program.
Personnel not directly involved with patient care will prepare a saline solution and a ropivacaine solution which will be allocated respectively to ESP or TAP block according to randomization.
This will allow blinding of patients, care providers and data collectors. Analysis will be done on allocation-concealed data, permitting blinded analysis.
Unbliding will be permitted if by doing so harm to one or more patients can be avoided or treated. After information of one of the principal investigators, specific patient allocation will be retrieved from the randomization program.
Other methods of minimising bias
Pain scores will be measured at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hours after extubation and at the time of administration of reserve analgesics.
The administration of reserve analgesics will follow a standardized internal protocol.
Questionnaires validated to assess functional results after hernia surgery will be used for this study:
- pain: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
- surgical complications classification: Clavien Dindo's classification
- comorbidities : American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score
- validated LPPS questionnaire for the perioperative patients' satisfaction [21]
- EHS inguinal hernia classification
- Being tested
- ESP block, TAP block
- Medical subject headings
- Hernia, Inguinal, Pain, Postoperative
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ESP blockProcedure or surgery
US guided ESP infiltration (saline solution vs Ropivacaine 0.2% according to randomization): bilateral injection of 30ml (60ml total) under US guidance between the deep fascia of erector spinae muscle and the the two transverse process at the level of the 10th thoracic vertebrae
TAP blockProcedure or surgery
US guided TAP block (saline solution vs Ropivacaine 0.2% according to randomization):
bilateral injection of 30ml (total 60ml) under US guidance in the plane between the internal oblique and transversus abdominis muscles at the level of the midaxillary line in the Petit triangle.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| real ESP, placebo TAP | Experimental | US-guided ESP block + sham US-guided TAP block Receives: Procedure: ESP block |
| real TAP, placebo ESP | Active comparator | sham US-guided ESP block + US-guided TAP block before laparoscopic hernia repair Receives: Procedure: TAP block |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Highest Visual Analogue Scale
0 to 100mm, highest equals to more pain
Measured: Between end of sedation and 6 hours after surgery
Secondary outcomes (5)
Visual Analogue Scale score at rest and at movement
0 to 100mm, highest equals to more pain
Measured: 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hours after surgery
Total dose of rescue opioids
(morphine equiavalents)
Measured: in the first 24 hours after surgery
Time of first walk after surgery
Measured: 24 hours
Episodes of urinary retention
Measured: 24 hours
Need for anti-nausea medication (dosage, doses and time points)
Measured: 24 hours
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Feb 2021
- Study start11 Jan 2021
- Primary completion31 May 2022
- Study completion31 May 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Inguinal HerniaStudies 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
- Model description
- This is a single center, prospective, randomized, "double-dummy" placebo-blinded, controlled superiority trial in 2 parallel arms comparing the efficacy and safety of the ESP Block and the TAP block on patients undergoing elective robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair.
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ghielmini Enea
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Ghielmini Enea, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Bellinzona
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04750512
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- ORBV - CHIR - TAPESP
- Acronym
- TAPESP
- Status last verified
- Aug 2022
- First submitted
- 9 Feb 2021
- Last updated
- 15 Aug 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Ghielmini EM, Greco L, Spampatti S, Kubli R, Saporito A, La Regina D. Erector Spinae Plane Block versus Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Blinded, Active-Controlled, Randomized Trial. Pain Physician. 2024 Jan;27(1):27-34.
PubMed 38285028
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Aug 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparing Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) and Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) Block Analgesic Effect After Robotic TAPP Abdominal Hernia Repair: a Single Center, Randomized, Triple-blind, Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04750512
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TAPESP / ORBV - CHIR - TAPESP
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ghielmini EneaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 11 Jan 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 May 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 May 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Feb 2021 (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.
The Erectore Spinae Plane Block (ESP Block) is a recently described technique for regional anesthesia that has shown promising results in the treatment of pain after thoracic surgery. It involves the injection of local anesthetic behind the musculature of the back.
The investigators intend to compare this technique with a more standardized one, the TAP Block, which involves injection of anesthetic behind the musculature of the abdomen.
50 patients undergoing robotic inguinal hernia repair under general anesthesia will be randomly selected to receive, in addition to general anesthesia, either the ESP block or the TAP block. Patients receiving an ESP Block will also receive an injection of saline solution in the TAP injection site, and the other way around. This will prevent preconceived ideas on either technique to influence the evaluationso of the effect.
Pain scores and consumption of pain medication will be recorded during the 24 hours following the operation to compare the effect of the two techniques.
Detailed description
In the recent era of increased awareness towards the risks and complications of opioid treatment, pain management after common surgical interventions by the means of regional anesthesia is of renewed interest for both clinical and logistic reasons, as it is known that good pain management reduces complications and cost associated to surgery.
Regional and local anesthetic techniques after inguinal hernia surgery have been the topic of multiple studies, comparing various infiltrative methods, including wound infiltration, port site infiltration, iliohypogastric and ilioinguinal nerve block, paravertebral and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and epidural analgesia. Most methods investigate pain treatment in the setting of open surgery. The progressive evolution towards laparoscopic and robot-assisted methods changes the mechanisms of surgical pain and, with it, the rational for the choice of the analgesic technique adopted. The transversus abdominis plane (TAP) has become a widely used technique and has been demonstrated to be associated to a mild opioid sparing effect, but with inconsistent results.
The erector spinae plane block is a promising technique, recently described and used especially in thoracic surgery. Multiple case reports and studies in pediatrics report it to be a safe and effective method for abdominal surgery as well, but no prospective randomized trials were published to date in the adult population, particularly with regard to laparoscopic or robotic hernia repair. A prospective comparison between the two techniques is therefore needed in this specific context.
Hypothesis and primary objective:
The investigators hypothesize the superiority of the ESP-block to the TAP-block with respect to post-operative pain control after abdominal surgery, leading to a reduction in reserve analgesic consumption.
Our objective is to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of ESP block versus TAP block in patients undergoing robot-assisted TAPP inguinal hernia repair.
Primary and secondary endpoints:
Primary Endpoint:
- The highest VAS score reported between end of sedation and 6 hours after surgery or discharge of the patient, whichever comes first Secondary Endpoints
- Time to first rescue analgesic
- Total dose of rescue opioids (morphine equiavalents) in the first 24 hours after surgery
- Time of first walk after surgery
- Need for anti-nausea medication (dosage, doses and time points)
- Episodes of vomiting
- Episodes of urinary retention
- Patient's satisfaction (measured on the validated LPPS questionnaire for the perioperative patients' satisfaction )
- Length of hospital stay
Study design This is a single center, prospective, randomized, placebo-blinded, controlled superiority trial in 2 parallel arms comparing the efficacy and safety of the ESP Block and the TAP block on patients undergoing elective robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair.
Follow up will consist in the hospitalization period plus one telephone consultation at 24 hours after hospitalization.
Methods of minimizing bias:
Randomisation - Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio by a computer generated random number sequence through the RedCap software system.
Blinding procedures
According to the randomization arm patients will receive:
- sham US-guided ESP block + US-guided TAP block before laparoscopic hernia repair
- US-guided ESP block + sham US-guided TAP block before laparoscopic hernia repair Allocation will take place immediately before the intervention by the means of access to centralized, real-time allocation through a computer program.
Personnel not directly involved with patient care will prepare a saline solution and a ropivacaine solution which will be allocated respectively to ESP or TAP block according to randomization.
This will allow blinding of patients, care providers and data collectors. Analysis will be done on allocation-concealed data, permitting blinded analysis.
Unbliding will be permitted if by doing so harm to one or more patients can be avoided or treated. After information of one of the principal investigators, specific patient allocation will be retrieved from the randomization program.
Other methods of minimising bias
Pain scores will be measured at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hours after extubation and at the time of administration of reserve analgesics.
The administration of reserve analgesics will follow a standardized internal protocol.
Questionnaires validated to assess functional results after hernia surgery will be used for this study:
- pain: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
- surgical complications classification: Clavien Dindo's classification
- comorbidities : American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score
- validated LPPS questionnaire for the perioperative patients' satisfaction [21]
- EHS inguinal hernia classification
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This is a single center, prospective, randomized, "double-dummy" placebo-blinded, controlled superiority trial in 2 parallel arms comparing the efficacy and safety of the ESP Block and the TAP block on patients undergoing elective robot-assisted inguinal hernia repair.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| real ESP, placebo TAP | Experimental | Procedure: ESP blockUS-guided ESP block + sham US-guided TAP block |
| real TAP, placebo ESP | Active comparator | Procedure: TAP blocksham US-guided ESP block + US-guided TAP block before laparoscopic hernia repair |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Informed Consent as documented by signature
- Patients over 18 years of age
- Planned elective unilateral or bilateral robot-assisted TAPP hernia repair, with mesh placement
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Contraindications to ropivacaine or opioids, e.g. known hypersensitivity or allergy
- Infections at the injection site
- Coagulopathies or ongoing anticoagulant therapy
- Concomitant surgery other than inguinal or umbilical hernia repair
- Pre-operative chronic narcotic usage
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 |
|---|---|---|
| ESP blockUS guided ESP infiltration (saline solution vs Ropivacaine 0.2% according to randomization): bilateral injection of 30ml (60ml total) under US guidance between the deep fascia of erector spinae muscle and the the two transverse process at the level of the 10th thoracic vertebrae | Procedure or surgery | real ESP, placebo TAP |
| TAP blockUS guided TAP block (saline solution vs Ropivacaine 0.2% according to randomization): bilateral injection of 30ml (total 60ml) under US guidance in the plane between the internal oblique and transversus abdominis muscles at the level of the midaxillary line in the Petit triangle. | Procedure or surgery | real TAP, placebo ESP |
Primary outcome
Highest Visual Analogue Scale
Time frame: Between end of sedation and 6 hours after surgery
0 to 100mm, highest equals to more pain
5 secondary outcomes
Visual Analogue Scale score at rest and at movement
Time frame: 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 hours after surgery
Total dose of rescue opioids
Time frame: in the first 24 hours after surgery
Time of first walk after surgery
Time frame: 24 hours
Episodes of urinary retention
Time frame: 24 hours
Need for anti-nausea medication (dosage, doses and time points)
Time frame: 24 hours
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 15 Aug 2022.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38285028Ghielmini EM, Greco L, Spampatti S, Kubli R, Saporito A, La Regina D. Erector Spinae Plane Block versus Transversus Abdominis Plane Block for Robotic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Blinded, Active-Controlled, Randomized Trial. Pain Physician. 2024 Jan;27(1):27-34.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Inguinal Hernia
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar ESP Block Versus TAP Block for Postoperative Pain Control in Children Undergoing Open Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia, Postoperative Pain
Recruiting
Comparing Two Laparoscopic Techniques for Hernia Repair in Children
Inguinal Hernia
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Laryngeal Mask Airway vs Endotracheal Tube on Hypothermia in Laparoscopic Hernia Surgery
Perioperative Hypothermia, Hernia, Inguinal
Not yet recruiting
Bassini Repair Versus Desarda Technique in Urgent Complicated Inguinal Hernia Repair
Inguinal Hernia, Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia
Active, not recruiting
Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of a New Laparoscopic Non-mesh Hernia Needle Set Designed for Indirect Inguinal Hernia
Inguinal Hernia, Without Mention of Obstruction or Gangrene
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing ESP block and TAP block in people with Inguinal Hernia and Postoperative Pain, run by Ghielmini Enea at 1 site in Switzerland.
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 3 inclusion and 11 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 15 Aug 2022. 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 Switzerland. 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?
Highest Visual Analogue Scale (time frame: Between end of sedation and 6 hours after surgery). 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 NCT04750512, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 15 Aug 2022.