Lung DiseasesNCT06964698
Optimizing Post-Thoracotomy Pain Management: Comparing Erector Spinae vs. Paravertebral Block in Thoracotomy Patients
An observational study of Lung Diseases and Lung Cancers, run by Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City Hospital at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This prospective, observational study included ASA class II-III patients aged 18-70 years who underwent elective unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy. The study was conducted at Başakşehir Çam and Sakura City Hospital, following approval from the hospital's ethics committee on May 20, 2022 (protocol number… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Lung Diseases, Lung Cancers
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 1 Jun 2022to 1 Feb 2023
- How long will I take part?
- 2 Months
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Adult patients aged 18-70 years who underwent unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy approach under elective conditions
Who may be able to join
- Patients were planned to elective thoracotomy
- Patients classified as ASA II-III,
- No history of previous thoracotomy,
- No chronic pain or analgesic dependence,
- Adequate preoperative cooperation.
Who cannot join
- Known drug allergies
- Chronic analgesic use
- Preexisting neuropathic conditions.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Başakşehir Çam Ve Sakura Şehir Hastanesi
Istanbul, Basaksehir, 34480
About this study
Official title: Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Paravertebral Block for Post-Thoracotomy Pain Syndrome in Thoracotomy Patients; A Prospective Observational Study
This prospective, observational study included ASA class II-III patients aged 18-70 years who underwent elective unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy. The study was conducted at Başakşehir Çam and Sakura City Hospital, following approval from the hospital's ethics committee on May 20, 2022 (protocol number: KAEK.2022.05.155). Patients were randomized into two groups based on the type of preoperative block administered: ESPB (n = 30) and PVB (n = 30). Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia was provided for 24 hours postoperatively. Resting NRS and Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) scores were evaluated at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours after surgery. Pain levels were further assessed via telephone interviews using the NRS at 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively.
Read the detailed description
Study Design and Ethics Approval It was conducted as a prospective, observational trial at the Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital, after approval had been obtained from the ethics committee of the Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital on May 20,2022, (protocol number: KAEK.2022.05.155). Our study recognises the Declaration of Helsinki as a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human participants.
Patient Population and Randomization Adult patients aged 18-70 years who underwent unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy approach under elective conditions between June 1, 2022, and December 1, 2022, were included in the study. Informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to enrollment. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients classified as ASA II-III, no history of previous thoracotomy, no chronic pain or analgesic dependence, and adequate preoperative cooperation. The exclusion criteria included patients with known drug allergies, chronic analgesic use, or preexisting neuropathic conditions.
Randomization was performed via a computer-generated sequence to ensure the true random allocation of patients into either the ESPB or the PVB group. The sequence was concealed via sealed opaque envelopes, which were opened by the attending anesthesiologist just before block administration. No stratification was applied; however, group assignment was conducted to ensure an equal distribution of patients by sex, age, and ASA status. The anesthesiologist monitoring postoperative pain was blinded to the type of block administered.
Preoperative anaesthesia preparation and block protocols All patients received standard ASA monitoring, including invasive blood pressure measurement. All blocks were performed by the same anesthesiologist (O.A.), who had more than 7 years of experience in ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia.
Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) Protocol For ESPB, the patient was positioned in a seated posture, and under sterile conditions, a 22G, 80 mm Stimuplex® D block needle (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was inserted between the T6 and T7 transverse processes and the erector spinae muscle via ultrasound guidance (Fujifilm Arietta 65, Tokyo, Japan). The T6-T7 level was chosen on the basis of its proximity to the thoracic surgical site, allowing for optimal coverage of the thoracic dermatomes. Following negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected via hydrodissection to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered.
Paravertebral block (PVB) protocol For the PVB, the patient was seated, and a 22G block needle was inserted into the paravertebral space at the T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The T5 level was selected to provide direct analgesia to the thoracic paravertebral space, which is known to block multiple thoracic nerves. After negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered following hydrodissection.
Anaesthesia Protocol Premedication was achieved with 2 mg intravenous midazolam, which was administered prior to the block performance. General anaesthesia induction was achieved with 2 mcg/kg fentanyl and 1.5-3 mg/kg propofol, with a target bispectral index (BIS) between 40 and 60. Neuromuscular blockade was induced via 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium, and maintenance of anaesthesia was achieved via sevoflurane (1%-2%) and remifentanil (0.05--0.2 mcg/kg/min) in a 50% oxygen/air mixture. All patients underwent orotracheal intubation with a double-lumen tube appropriate for their body height and surgical side, and mechanical ventilation parameters were standardized across all patients. A standard posterolateral thoracotomy was performed through the fifth intercostal space to provide surgical access. For optimal postoperative drainage and lung re-expansion, a 28 Fr chest tube was inserted through the sixth intercostal space, one level below the thoracotomy incision. All operations were carried out by the same team.
At the conclusion of the surgery, patients were administered 1 g of paracetamol and 100 mg of tramadol intravenously, followed by decurarization with 2-4 mg/kg sugammadex. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device (BodyGuard 595) with a basal infusion of 2.5 mL/h of tramadol (500 mg tramadol in 125 mL of 0.9% NaCl) was used for postoperative analgesia (intermittent bolus dose of 5 mL - lock time 30 min). Morphine (0.1 mg/kg) was used as a rescue analgesic if the NRS score exceeded 4 out of 10.
Outcome Measurements The primary outcome was postoperative pain, which was assessed via the NRS and the Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. Pain levels were also assessed at 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively, with phone calls for follow-up. Although phone assessments may introduce bias due to the subjective nature of self-reported pain levels, this method was chosen to maintain follow-up consistency across all patients. To mitigate this limitation, the same standardized questionnaire was used for all phone assessments, and patients were instructed to report their pain levels accurately.
The secondary outcomes included the incidence of PTPS at 2 months, the total consumption of opioids via the PCA device, the number of requests for rescue analgesia, and the incidence of complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage. Additionally, demographic characteristics, intraoperative hemodynamic data, and surgical duration were recorded.
The secondary outcomes included the incidence of PTPS at 2 months; the total consumption of opioids via the PCA device at 24 hours postoperatively; the number of requests for rescue analgesia within the first 24 hours postoperatively; and the incidence of complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage. Hemodynamic variables were assessed with measurements taken at the following predefined times: preoperatively, end of induction, time of skin incision, 30th, 60th, 90th and 120th minute of block and end of surgery. Additionally, demographic characteristics, intraoperative hemodynamic data, and surgical duration were recorded.
Statistical analysis A power analysis was conducted to determine the required sample size, with an alpha of 0.05 and beta of 0.1, expecting a minimum 3 mg difference in 24-hour opioid consumption between the groups (doi: 10.7759/cureus.59459). Based on an estimated effect size of Cohen's d ≈ 0.9, a minimum of 60 patients (30 per group) were included to achieve a power of 90%. A total of 64 patients were enrolled to account for potential attrition. The data were analysed via SPSS (Mac OS, version 27.0). The normality of the data was assessed with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Normally distributed data were analyzed using independent t-tests, while non-normally distributed data were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Continuous variables are presented as the means ± standard deviations, and categorical variables are presented as frequencies and percentages. Statistical significance was determined by p values < 0.05.
- Conditions
- Lung Diseases, Lung Cancers
- Keywords
- thoracotomy, erector spinae plane block, paravertebral block, post-operative pain syndrome
- Medical subject headings
- Lung Diseases, Lung Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Paravertebral Block (PVB) | Includes patients with paravertebral block as analgesic For the PVB, the patient was seated, and a 22G block needle was inserted into the paravertebral space at the T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The T5 level was selected to provide direct analgesia to the thoracic paravertebral space, which is known to block multiple thoracic nerves. After negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered following hydrodissection. | |
| Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) | Includes patients with Erector Spinae Plane Block as analgesic. For ESPB, the patient was positioned in a seated posture, and under sterile conditions, a 22G, 80 mm Stimuplex® D block needle (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was inserted between the T6 and T7 transverse processes and the erector spinae muscle via ultrasound guidance (Fujifilm Arietta 65, Tokyo, Japan). The T6-T7 level was chosen on the basis of its proximity to the thoracic surgical site, allowing for optimal coverage of the thoracic dermatomes. Following negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected via hydrodissection to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The numeric rating scale (NRS)
The numeric rating scale (NRS) is a pain screening tool, commonly used to assess pain severity at that moment in time using a 0-10 scale, with zero meaning "no pain" and 10 meaning "the worst pain imaginable.
Measured: The numeric rating scale (NRS) was assessed at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours, 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively,
The Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS)
The Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale is a pain screening tool at physical activity. Pain is estimated during elementary physical activity: 0 - no pain, cough, 1 - pain when coughing, lack during deep breathing, 2 - pain during deep breathing, lack of rest, 3 - slight pain at rest, 4 - severe pain at rest.
Measured: The Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) was assessed at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours, 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively,
Secondary outcomes (4)
The incidence of post-thoracotomy pain syndrome
The incidence of post-thoracotomy pain syndrome is a pain screening tool, commonly used to assess pain severity at that moment in time using a 0-10 scale, with zero meaning "no pain" and 10 meaning "the worst pain imaginable.
Measured: The incidence of post-thoracotomy pain syndrome was assessed at 2 months postoperatively.
The number of request of opioids
The number of request of opioids via the PCA device was accessed.
Measured: The number of request of opioids was assessed at 24 hours postoperatively.
The incidence of complications
Complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage was accessed.
Measured: The incidence of complications was assessed at 24 hours postoperatively.
The total consumption of opioids
The total consumption of opioids via the PCA device was accessed.
Measured: The total consumption of opioids was assessed at 24 hours postoperatively.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 May 2025
- Study start1 Jun 2022
- Primary completion1 Dec 2022
- Study completion1 Feb 2023
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 Lung DiseasesStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Target duration
- 2 Months
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City Hospital
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ozal Adiyeke, Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06964698
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- KAEK.2022.05.155
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 2 Apr 2025
- Last updated
- 9 May 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes
Publications
Baser K, Adiyeke O, Mendes E, Gumus Ozcan F. Optimizing post-thoracotomy pain management: comparing erector spinae vs. paravertebral block in thoracotomy patients: a prospective randomized study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2025 Jul 30;25(1):368. doi: 10.1186/s12871-025-03237-1.
PubMed 40739476
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 May 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Paravertebral Block for Post-Thoracotomy Pain Syndrome in Thoracotomy Patients; A Prospective Observational Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06964698
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- KAEK.2022.05.155
- Conditions
- Lung Diseases, Lung Cancers
- Keywords
- thoracotomy, erector spinae plane block, paravertebral block, post-operative pain syndrome
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City HospitalOther government
- Study start
- 1 Jun 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Feb 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 May 2025 (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.
This prospective, observational study included ASA class II-III patients aged 18-70 years who underwent elective unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy. The study was conducted at Başakşehir Çam and Sakura City Hospital, following approval from the hospital's ethics committee on May 20, 2022 (protocol number: KAEK.2022.05.155). Patients were randomized into two groups based on the type of preoperative block administered: ESPB (n = 30) and PVB (n = 30). Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia was provided for 24 hours postoperatively. Resting NRS and Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) scores were evaluated at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours after surgery. Pain levels were further assessed via telephone interviews using the NRS at 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively.
Detailed description
Study Design and Ethics Approval It was conducted as a prospective, observational trial at the Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital, after approval had been obtained from the ethics committee of the Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital on May 20,2022, (protocol number: KAEK.2022.05.155). Our study recognises the Declaration of Helsinki as a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human participants.
Patient Population and Randomization Adult patients aged 18-70 years who underwent unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy approach under elective conditions between June 1, 2022, and December 1, 2022, were included in the study. Informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to enrollment. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients classified as ASA II-III, no history of previous thoracotomy, no chronic pain or analgesic dependence, and adequate preoperative cooperation. The exclusion criteria included patients with known drug allergies, chronic analgesic use, or preexisting neuropathic conditions.
Randomization was performed via a computer-generated sequence to ensure the true random allocation of patients into either the ESPB or the PVB group. The sequence was concealed via sealed opaque envelopes, which were opened by the attending anesthesiologist just before block administration. No stratification was applied; however, group assignment was conducted to ensure an equal distribution of patients by sex, age, and ASA status. The anesthesiologist monitoring postoperative pain was blinded to the type of block administered.
Preoperative anaesthesia preparation and block protocols All patients received standard ASA monitoring, including invasive blood pressure measurement. All blocks were performed by the same anesthesiologist (O.A.), who had more than 7 years of experience in ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia.
Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) Protocol For ESPB, the patient was positioned in a seated posture, and under sterile conditions, a 22G, 80 mm Stimuplex® D block needle (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was inserted between the T6 and T7 transverse processes and the erector spinae muscle via ultrasound guidance (Fujifilm Arietta 65, Tokyo, Japan). The T6-T7 level was chosen on the basis of its proximity to the thoracic surgical site, allowing for optimal coverage of the thoracic dermatomes. Following negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected via hydrodissection to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered.
Paravertebral block (PVB) protocol For the PVB, the patient was seated, and a 22G block needle was inserted into the paravertebral space at the T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The T5 level was selected to provide direct analgesia to the thoracic paravertebral space, which is known to block multiple thoracic nerves. After negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered following hydrodissection.
Anaesthesia Protocol Premedication was achieved with 2 mg intravenous midazolam, which was administered prior to the block performance. General anaesthesia induction was achieved with 2 mcg/kg fentanyl and 1.5-3 mg/kg propofol, with a target bispectral index (BIS) between 40 and 60. Neuromuscular blockade was induced via 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium, and maintenance of anaesthesia was achieved via sevoflurane (1%-2%) and remifentanil (0.05--0.2 mcg/kg/min) in a 50% oxygen/air mixture. All patients underwent orotracheal intubation with a double-lumen tube appropriate for their body height and surgical side, and mechanical ventilation parameters were standardized across all patients. A standard posterolateral thoracotomy was performed through the fifth intercostal space to provide surgical access. For optimal postoperative drainage and lung re-expansion, a 28 Fr chest tube was inserted through the sixth intercostal space, one level below the thoracotomy incision. All operations were carried out by the same team.
At the conclusion of the surgery, patients were administered 1 g of paracetamol and 100 mg of tramadol intravenously, followed by decurarization with 2-4 mg/kg sugammadex. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device (BodyGuard 595) with a basal infusion of 2.5 mL/h of tramadol (500 mg tramadol in 125 mL of 0.9% NaCl) was used for postoperative analgesia (intermittent bolus dose of 5 mL - lock time 30 min). Morphine (0.1 mg/kg) was used as a rescue analgesic if the NRS score exceeded 4 out of 10.
Outcome Measurements The primary outcome was postoperative pain, which was assessed via the NRS and the Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively. Pain levels were also assessed at 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively, with phone calls for follow-up. Although phone assessments may introduce bias due to the subjective nature of self-reported pain levels, this method was chosen to maintain follow-up consistency across all patients. To mitigate this limitation, the same standardized questionnaire was used for all phone assessments, and patients were instructed to report their pain levels accurately.
The secondary outcomes included the incidence of PTPS at 2 months, the total consumption of opioids via the PCA device, the number of requests for rescue analgesia, and the incidence of complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage. Additionally, demographic characteristics, intraoperative hemodynamic data, and surgical duration were recorded.
The secondary outcomes included the incidence of PTPS at 2 months; the total consumption of opioids via the PCA device at 24 hours postoperatively; the number of requests for rescue analgesia within the first 24 hours postoperatively; and the incidence of complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, or nerve damage. Hemodynamic variables were assessed with measurements taken at the following predefined times: preoperatively, end of induction, time of skin incision, 30th, 60th, 90th and 120th minute of block and end of surgery. Additionally, demographic characteristics, intraoperative hemodynamic data, and surgical duration were recorded.
Statistical analysis A power analysis was conducted to determine the required sample size, with an alpha of 0.05 and beta of 0.1, expecting a minimum 3 mg difference in 24-hour opioid consumption between the groups (doi: 10.7759/cureus.59459). Based on an estimated effect size of Cohen's d ≈ 0.9, a minimum of 60 patients (30 per group) were included to achieve a power of 90%. A total of 64 patients were enrolled to account for potential attrition. The data were analysed via SPSS (Mac OS, version 27.0). The normality of the data was assessed with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Normally distributed data were analyzed using independent t-tests, while non-normally distributed data were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. Continuous variables are presented as the means ± standard deviations, and categorical variables are presented as frequencies and percentages. Statistical significance was determined by p values < 0.05.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 2 Months
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Paravertebral Block (PVB) | – | –Includes patients with paravertebral block as analgesic For the PVB, the patient was seated, and a 22G block needle was inserted into the paravertebral space at the T5 level under ultrasound guidance. The T5 level was selected to provide direct analgesia to the thoracic paravertebral space, which is known to block multiple thoracic nerves. After negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered following hydrodissection. |
| Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) | – | –Includes patients with Erector Spinae Plane Block as analgesic. For ESPB, the patient was positioned in a seated posture, and under sterile conditions, a 22G, 80 mm Stimuplex® D block needle (B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was inserted between the T6 and T7 transverse processes and the erector spinae muscle via ultrasound guidance (Fujifilm Arietta 65, Tokyo, Japan). The T6-T7 level was chosen on the basis of its proximity to the thoracic surgical site, allowing for optimal coverage of the thoracic dermatomes. Following negative aspiration, 1 mL of saline was injected via hydrodissection to confirm correct needle placement, and 20 mL of 0.375% bupivacaine was administered. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Adult patients aged 18-70 years who underwent unilateral lobectomy via a thoracotomy approach under elective conditions
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patients were planned to elective thoracotomy
- Patients classified as ASA II-III,
- No history of previous thoracotomy,
- No chronic pain or analgesic dependence,
- Adequate preoperative cooperation.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Known drug allergies
- Chronic analgesic use
- Preexisting neuropathic conditions.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
The numeric rating scale (NRS)
Time frame: The numeric rating scale (NRS) was assessed at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours, 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively,
The numeric rating scale (NRS) is a pain screening tool, commonly used to assess pain severity at that moment in time using a 0-10 scale, with zero meaning "no pain" and 10 meaning "the worst pain imaginable.
The Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS)
Time frame: The Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale (PHHPS) was assessed at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours, 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively,
The Prince Henry Hospital Pain Scale is a pain screening tool at physical activity. Pain is estimated during elementary physical activity: 0 - no pain, cough, 1 - pain when coughing, lack during deep breathing, 2 - pain during deep breathing, lack of rest, 3 - slight pain at rest, 4 - severe pain at rest.
4 secondary outcomes
The incidence of post-thoracotomy pain syndrome
Time frame: The incidence of post-thoracotomy pain syndrome was assessed at 2 months postoperatively.
The number of request of opioids
Time frame: The number of request of opioids was assessed at 24 hours postoperatively.
The incidence of complications
Time frame: The incidence of complications was assessed at 24 hours postoperatively.
The total consumption of opioids
Time frame: The total consumption of opioids was assessed at 24 hours postoperatively.
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 9 May 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40739476Baser K, Adiyeke O, Mendes E, Gumus Ozcan F. Optimizing post-thoracotomy pain management: comparing erector spinae vs. paravertebral block in thoracotomy patients: a prospective randomized study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2025 Jul 30;25(1):368. doi: 10.1186/s12871-025-03237-1.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes
Related trials for Lung Diseases
Recruiting
MRD-Guided Postoperative Surveillance and Adaptive Treatment for Resectable Lung Cancer
Lung Neoplasms, Neoadjuvant Therapy
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Study to Compare the Efficacy, Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Immunogenicity Between SB27 and Keytruda in Subjects With Metastatic Non-squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Stage IV
RecruitingObservational study
Label-free Femtosecond Laser Imaging Combined With the Fast Lung Artificial Intelligence Model for Rapid Intraoperative Diagnosis of Lung Surgical Specimens: A Multicentre, Prospective, Parallel-workflow, Non-inferiority Study.
Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study of Calderasib (MK-1084) Plus Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in Participants With KRAS G12C Mutant Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) With Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Tumor Proportion Score (TPS) ≥50% (MK-1084-004/KANDLELIT-004)
Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Efficacy and Safety of Ivonescimab Plus Pemetrexed and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma
Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma, Advanced
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?
An observational study of Lung Diseases and Lung Cancers, run by Başakşehir Çam & Sakura City Hospital 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 5 inclusion and 3 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 9 May 2025. 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?
The numeric rating scale (NRS) (time frame: The numeric rating scale (NRS) was assessed at 0, 2, 6, 12 and 24 hours, 2 weeks and 2 months postoperatively,). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT06964698, 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 9 May 2025.