Erector Spinae BlockNCT07624058
Erector Spina Plane Block Versus Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
A study testing bilateral ESP block and bilateral M-TAPA block in people with Erector Spinae Block and Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block, run by Alexandria University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
direct comparisons between ESPB and M-TAPA for postoperative analgesia after LC remain limited. This is an important area of clinical interest because the two blocks differ significantly in their anatomical targets, mechanism of analgesia, and likely dermatomal coverage. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 30 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Erector Spinae Block, Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block, Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
- What is being tested?
- bilateral ESP block and bilateral M-TAPA block
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Apr 2026to 1 Mar 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 30 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age: between 30 - 65
- American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status: I- III
- Body mass index: 18-35 kg.m-2
Who cannot join
- Patient Refusal
- Allergy to local anaesthetic agents.
- Skin infection at the site of injection.
- Coagulopathy.
- Diabetes Mellitus
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Egypt1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Alexandria University
Alexandria
sarah m elgamal, MD, 01005496440, sarahelgamal1990@yahoo.com
sarah m elgamal, MD
About this study
Official title: Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block For Pain Control After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
direct comparisons between ESPB and M-TAPA for postoperative analgesia after LC remain limited. This is an important area of clinical interest because the two blocks differ significantly in their anatomical targets, mechanism of analgesia, and likely dermatomal coverage. The ESPB provides analgesia through paravertebral spread affecting both dorsal and ventral rami, thereby offering posterior and visceral pain relief, whereas M-TAPA directly targets the thoracoabdominal nerves, resulting in better anterior and lateral abdominal wall analgesia. Understanding which technique offers superior or more balanced analgesia could help to optimise regional anaesthesia strategies in LC and to improve patient outcomes.
Read the detailed description
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has largely replaced open cholecystectomy as the standard surgical treatment for symptomatic gallbladder disease. The minimally invasive approach is associated with significantly less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, faster return to normal activity, lower risk of wound infection, and better cosmetic results. (1,2) Despite these advantages, many patients still experience moderate to severe pain in the early postoperative period. This pain results from a combination of somatic pain at trocar insertion sites, visceral pain due to gallbladder bed irritation, and referred shoulder pain from diaphragmatic stretching caused by pneumoperitoneum. (3) Effective postoperative pain control is crucial not only to improve patient comfort but also to reduce opioid consumption, facilitate early ambulation, and decrease postoperative pulmonary complications. (4) Traditionally, postoperative analgesia following LC has relied on multimodal regimens including systemic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, port-site local infiltration, and intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation. (5) While opioids remain an important analgesic option, their side effects-such as nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, pruritus, and delayed recovery-can adversely affect the quality of postoperative recovery. (6) Consequently, there has been increasing interest in the use of ultrasound-guided regional anaesthetic techniques as part of multimodal analgesia to improve pain control and reduce opioid requirements after LC.
Among these regional approaches, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has gained significant attention in recent years. The ESPB involves injecting local anaesthetic into the fascial plane deep to the erector spinae muscle, typically at a thoracic vertebral level. This allows cranio-caudal spread and potential diffusion into the paravertebral and epidural spaces, resulting in both visceral and somatic analgesia across multiple dermatomes. (7) 4. It was found that bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block has shown promising benefits for postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy which includes, reduction in postoperative pain scores, reduced opioid requirements, improved recovery and improved postoperative respiratory function and these findings highlight ESPB as an effective, safe and easy to perform block for postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. (8) A newer alternative regional technique is the Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block through the Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA). First described by Tulgar et al., this block targets the anterior and lateral cutaneous branches of the thoracoabdominal nerves (T5-T12) by depositing local anaesthetic in the perichondral plane beneath the costal cartilage. (9) Its theoretical advantage lies in providing both anterior and lateral abdominal wall analgesia, which corresponds well to the sites of trocar insertion in LC. Early evidence has been promising and demonstrated that bilateral M-TAPA significantly reduced postoperative pain scores. M-TAPA significantly reduced 24-hour opioid consumption and decreased the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and also shortened hospital stay and improved patient satisfaction following LC.
AIM OF THE WORK To compare the analgesic efficacy of the Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) versus the Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block through the Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA) for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia.
Primary outcome:
Time to First Analgesic request.
Secondary outcomes:
- Total Nalbuphine consumption.
- Visual analogue score (VAS) in the first 24 hours after surgery.
- Patient satisfaction.
- Quality of postoperative recovery (QOR 15).
- Incidence of complications or adverse events.
PATIENTS After approval of the Medical Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University and having an informed written consent from every patient included in this study, the present study will be carried out in Alexandria University Main Hospital on 50 patients aged between 30 and 65 years, of both sexes, belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists classes I-III who are scheduled for laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. The study will be designed as a double-blinded, single-center prospective, randomized comparative design. The sample size is approved to be sufficient by the department of statistics, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University.
By using SPSS program version 28, (12) A minimal total sample size of (34) patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (17) per group is needed to detect an assumed difference of (1) (13) in mean visual analogue scale (VAS) between a group of patients receiving erector spinae plane block with an assumed mean of (2.4±1.1) vs another group receiving modified thoracoabdominal nerve block with an assumed mean of (1.4±0.9) to evaluate the efficacy of both procedures regarding pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy using independent t test with a significance level of (0.05) and 80% power.
Patient grouping and randomization:
Patients will be randomized by sealed envelope technique into two equal groups (25 patients each):
Group (1): Twenty-five patients will receive bilateral ESP block with injection of 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine.
Group (2): Twenty-five patients will receive bilateral M-TAPA block with injection of 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine.
METHODS For every patient in the study the following will be done.
Preoperative assessment:
- Proper history taking.
- Complete clinical examination.
- Routine laboratory investigations and any other investigation needed.
Patient preparation:
On arrival to the operative theatre, a 20G intravenous cannula will be inserted in a peripheral vein.
The technique of anaesthesia will be explained to the patients. All patients will be premedicated with midazolam 0.05 mg/kg IV.
Monitoring:
Using a multichannel monitor (mindray patient monitor Model (iMEC10) CHINA), the patients will be monitored for:
- Noninvasive arterial blood pressure.
- Lead II electrocardiography (for rate and Rhythm).
- Pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2 %).
- End tidal CO2 (ETCO2). Standardized general anesthesia will then be induced in both groups. Anesthetic technique: Pre-oxygenation will be done for 3 minutes. Induction will be done with propofol 2 mg/kg intravenous (IV), fentanyl 2 μg/kg IV and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg IV to facilitate endotracheal intubation. Then volume control mechanical ventilation will be set, Tidal Volume 8ml/kg of ideal body weight and will be adjusted according to ETCO2 to maintain it between 35-40 mmHg. (15) Anesthesia will be maintained with 1-1.5% Isoflurane in 50% O2 and air. Muscle relaxation will be maintained with atracurium 0.1 mg/kg IV. (16) All patients will receive Dexamethasone (8 mg) intravenously as anti-emetic. (17) Regional anesthetic technique: After induction of general anaesthesia and prior to surgical incision, patients will be positioned for administration of the regional block according to their assigned study group. ● Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) Group o With the patient in the lateral position, using complete aseptic techniques, the T8 spinous process will first be identified in the midline using a high-frequency linear ultrasound probe (Sonosite). The probe will then be moved 2-3 cm laterally to visualize the characteristic hyperechoic shadow of the T8 transverse process, along with the overlying erector spinae muscle. Using an in-plane technique, an 18-gauge block needle will be advanced in a cranio-caudal direction until the needle tip contacts the posterior aspect of the T8 transverse process. The correct needle placement will be confirmed by hydrodissection of the interfascial plane with 2-3 ml of 0.9% normal saline, ensuring separation between the erector spinae muscle and the transverse process. Following confirmation of correct placement, 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine will be injected slowly under continuous ultrasound guidance. The spread of local anaesthetic in the fascial plane, extending cranio-caudally between the erector spinae muscle and the transverse processes, will be observed in real time to confirm adequate distribution. The same process will be repeated on the other side. ● Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block (M-TAPA) Group For patients allocated to the M-TAPA group, the procedure will be performed under similar aseptic and ultrasound-guided conditions, using the same type of needle and concentration of local anaesthetic. With the patient in the supine position, the ultrasound probe will be placed transversely over the costal margin at the T8-T9 level, and the perichondrial plane will be identified beneath the costal cartilage. Using an in-plane approach, the needle will be advanced until the tip reaches the desired plane, and correct positioning will be confirmed by hydrodissection with 2-3 ml of 0.9% saline. Subsequently, 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine will be injected, with visualization of local anaesthetic spread beneath the costal cartilage confirming proper deposition. The same process will be repeated on the other side. After the completion of surgery, residual neuromuscular blockade will be reversed with neostigmine 0.05 mg/kg and atropine 0.02 mg/kg intravenously. Following full recovery of spontaneous respiration and protective airway reflexes, patients will be extubated and transferred to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) for monitoring and postoperative evaluation. ● Post-operative management All patients will receive intravenous paracetamol 1 g every 6 hours, as well as Ketorolac 30 mg every 12 hours as baseline analgesia in the immediate post-operative period. If the VAS score is equal to or greater than 4, rescue analgesia in the form of intravenous nalbuphine 0.1 mg/kg will be administered and recorded. (16,18) Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) will be assessed using a 4-point scale (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) at the same time intervals as pain assessment. If moderate or severe nausea occurs, intravenous ondansetron 4 mg will be administered as rescue antiemetic therapy. Post operative outcomes will be assessed in ward by Doctors who are blinded to patient group assignment and study design.
- Being tested
- bilateral ESP block, bilateral M-TAPA block
- Keywords
- pain control, erector spinae block
- Medical subject headings
- Agnosia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
bilateral ESP blockOther
bilateral ESP block with injection of 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine.
bilateral M-TAPA blockOther
bilateral M-TAPA block with injection of 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| group 1 | Active comparator | patients will receive bilateral ESP block Receives: Other: bilateral ESP block |
| group 2 | Experimental | patients will receive bilateral M-TAPA block Receives: Other: bilateral M-TAPA block |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time to First Analgesic request
minutes
Measured: postoperative day 1
Secondary outcomes (4)
Total Nalbuphine consumption
mg
Measured: postoperative day 1
Visual analogue score
0 no pain , 10 severe pain
Measured: postoperative day1
Quality of postoperative recovery
QOR 15
Measured: postoperative day 1
Incidence of complications or adverse events
local anesthetic toxicity, bleeding
Measured: postoperative day 5
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Jun 2026
- Study start1 Apr 2026
- Primary completion1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Mar 2027 (estimated)
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 Erector Spinae BlockStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Alexandria 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Alexandria University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, sarah mohamed, Alexandria University
- Investigators
- sarah m elgamal, MD, Principal investigator, Alexandria University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07624058
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0109414
- Status last verified
- May 2026
- First submitted
- 29 May 2026
- Last updated
- 3 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Tulgar S, Selvi O, Thomas DT, Deveci U, Ozer Z. Modified thoracoabdominal nerves block through perichondrial approach (M-TAPA) provides effective analgesia in abdominal surgery and is a choice for opioid sparing anesthesia. J Clin Anesth. 2019 Aug;55:109. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Jan 9. No abstract available.
PubMed 30639940
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block For Pain Control After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07624058
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 0109414
- Keywords
- pain control, erector spinae block
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Alexandria UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Mar 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 Jun 2026 (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.
direct comparisons between ESPB and M-TAPA for postoperative analgesia after LC remain limited. This is an important area of clinical interest because the two blocks differ significantly in their anatomical targets, mechanism of analgesia, and likely dermatomal coverage. The ESPB provides analgesia through paravertebral spread affecting both dorsal and ventral rami, thereby offering posterior and visceral pain relief, whereas M-TAPA directly targets the thoracoabdominal nerves, resulting in better anterior and lateral abdominal wall analgesia. Understanding which technique offers superior or more balanced analgesia could help to optimise regional anaesthesia strategies in LC and to improve patient outcomes.
Detailed description
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has largely replaced open cholecystectomy as the standard surgical treatment for symptomatic gallbladder disease. The minimally invasive approach is associated with significantly less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, faster return to normal activity, lower risk of wound infection, and better cosmetic results. (1,2) Despite these advantages, many patients still experience moderate to severe pain in the early postoperative period. This pain results from a combination of somatic pain at trocar insertion sites, visceral pain due to gallbladder bed irritation, and referred shoulder pain from diaphragmatic stretching caused by pneumoperitoneum. (3) Effective postoperative pain control is crucial not only to improve patient comfort but also to reduce opioid consumption, facilitate early ambulation, and decrease postoperative pulmonary complications. (4) Traditionally, postoperative analgesia following LC has relied on multimodal regimens including systemic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, port-site local infiltration, and intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation. (5) While opioids remain an important analgesic option, their side effects-such as nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, pruritus, and delayed recovery-can adversely affect the quality of postoperative recovery. (6) Consequently, there has been increasing interest in the use of ultrasound-guided regional anaesthetic techniques as part of multimodal analgesia to improve pain control and reduce opioid requirements after LC.
Among these regional approaches, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has gained significant attention in recent years. The ESPB involves injecting local anaesthetic into the fascial plane deep to the erector spinae muscle, typically at a thoracic vertebral level. This allows cranio-caudal spread and potential diffusion into the paravertebral and epidural spaces, resulting in both visceral and somatic analgesia across multiple dermatomes. (7) 4. It was found that bilateral Erector Spinae Plane Block has shown promising benefits for postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy which includes, reduction in postoperative pain scores, reduced opioid requirements, improved recovery and improved postoperative respiratory function and these findings highlight ESPB as an effective, safe and easy to perform block for postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. (8) A newer alternative regional technique is the Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block through the Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA). First described by Tulgar et al., this block targets the anterior and lateral cutaneous branches of the thoracoabdominal nerves (T5-T12) by depositing local anaesthetic in the perichondral plane beneath the costal cartilage. (9) Its theoretical advantage lies in providing both anterior and lateral abdominal wall analgesia, which corresponds well to the sites of trocar insertion in LC. Early evidence has been promising and demonstrated that bilateral M-TAPA significantly reduced postoperative pain scores. M-TAPA significantly reduced 24-hour opioid consumption and decreased the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and also shortened hospital stay and improved patient satisfaction following LC.
AIM OF THE WORK To compare the analgesic efficacy of the Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) versus the Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block through the Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA) for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia.
Primary outcome:
Time to First Analgesic request.
Secondary outcomes:
- Total Nalbuphine consumption.
- Visual analogue score (VAS) in the first 24 hours after surgery.
- Patient satisfaction.
- Quality of postoperative recovery (QOR 15).
- Incidence of complications or adverse events.
PATIENTS After approval of the Medical Ethical Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University and having an informed written consent from every patient included in this study, the present study will be carried out in Alexandria University Main Hospital on 50 patients aged between 30 and 65 years, of both sexes, belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists classes I-III who are scheduled for laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. The study will be designed as a double-blinded, single-center prospective, randomized comparative design. The sample size is approved to be sufficient by the department of statistics, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University.
By using SPSS program version 28, (12) A minimal total sample size of (34) patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (17) per group is needed to detect an assumed difference of (1) (13) in mean visual analogue scale (VAS) between a group of patients receiving erector spinae plane block with an assumed mean of (2.4±1.1) vs another group receiving modified thoracoabdominal nerve block with an assumed mean of (1.4±0.9) to evaluate the efficacy of both procedures regarding pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy using independent t test with a significance level of (0.05) and 80% power.
Patient grouping and randomization:
Patients will be randomized by sealed envelope technique into two equal groups (25 patients each):
Group (1): Twenty-five patients will receive bilateral ESP block with injection of 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine.
Group (2): Twenty-five patients will receive bilateral M-TAPA block with injection of 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine.
METHODS For every patient in the study the following will be done.
Preoperative assessment:
- Proper history taking.
- Complete clinical examination.
- Routine laboratory investigations and any other investigation needed.
Patient preparation:
On arrival to the operative theatre, a 20G intravenous cannula will be inserted in a peripheral vein.
The technique of anaesthesia will be explained to the patients. All patients will be premedicated with midazolam 0.05 mg/kg IV.
Monitoring:
Using a multichannel monitor (mindray patient monitor Model (iMEC10) CHINA), the patients will be monitored for:
- Noninvasive arterial blood pressure.
- Lead II electrocardiography (for rate and Rhythm).
- Pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2 %).
- End tidal CO2 (ETCO2). Standardized general anesthesia will then be induced in both groups. Anesthetic technique: Pre-oxygenation will be done for 3 minutes. Induction will be done with propofol 2 mg/kg intravenous (IV), fentanyl 2 μg/kg IV and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg IV to facilitate endotracheal intubation. Then volume control mechanical ventilation will be set, Tidal Volume 8ml/kg of ideal body weight and will be adjusted according to ETCO2 to maintain it between 35-40 mmHg. (15) Anesthesia will be maintained with 1-1.5% Isoflurane in 50% O2 and air. Muscle relaxation will be maintained with atracurium 0.1 mg/kg IV. (16) All patients will receive Dexamethasone (8 mg) intravenously as anti-emetic. (17) Regional anesthetic technique: After induction of general anaesthesia and prior to surgical incision, patients will be positioned for administration of the regional block according to their assigned study group. ● Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) Group o With the patient in the lateral position, using complete aseptic techniques, the T8 spinous process will first be identified in the midline using a high-frequency linear ultrasound probe (Sonosite). The probe will then be moved 2-3 cm laterally to visualize the characteristic hyperechoic shadow of the T8 transverse process, along with the overlying erector spinae muscle. Using an in-plane technique, an 18-gauge block needle will be advanced in a cranio-caudal direction until the needle tip contacts the posterior aspect of the T8 transverse process. The correct needle placement will be confirmed by hydrodissection of the interfascial plane with 2-3 ml of 0.9% normal saline, ensuring separation between the erector spinae muscle and the transverse process. Following confirmation of correct placement, 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine will be injected slowly under continuous ultrasound guidance. The spread of local anaesthetic in the fascial plane, extending cranio-caudally between the erector spinae muscle and the transverse processes, will be observed in real time to confirm adequate distribution. The same process will be repeated on the other side. ● Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block (M-TAPA) Group For patients allocated to the M-TAPA group, the procedure will be performed under similar aseptic and ultrasound-guided conditions, using the same type of needle and concentration of local anaesthetic. With the patient in the supine position, the ultrasound probe will be placed transversely over the costal margin at the T8-T9 level, and the perichondrial plane will be identified beneath the costal cartilage. Using an in-plane approach, the needle will be advanced until the tip reaches the desired plane, and correct positioning will be confirmed by hydrodissection with 2-3 ml of 0.9% saline. Subsequently, 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine will be injected, with visualization of local anaesthetic spread beneath the costal cartilage confirming proper deposition. The same process will be repeated on the other side. After the completion of surgery, residual neuromuscular blockade will be reversed with neostigmine 0.05 mg/kg and atropine 0.02 mg/kg intravenously. Following full recovery of spontaneous respiration and protective airway reflexes, patients will be extubated and transferred to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) for monitoring and postoperative evaluation. ● Post-operative management All patients will receive intravenous paracetamol 1 g every 6 hours, as well as Ketorolac 30 mg every 12 hours as baseline analgesia in the immediate post-operative period. If the VAS score is equal to or greater than 4, rescue analgesia in the form of intravenous nalbuphine 0.1 mg/kg will be administered and recorded. (16,18) Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) will be assessed using a 4-point scale (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) at the same time intervals as pain assessment. If moderate or severe nausea occurs, intravenous ondansetron 4 mg will be administered as rescue antiemetic therapy. Post operative outcomes will be assessed in ward by Doctors who are blinded to patient group assignment and study design.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| group 1 | Active comparator | Other: bilateral ESP blockpatients will receive bilateral ESP block |
| group 2 | Experimental | Other: bilateral M-TAPA blockpatients will receive bilateral M-TAPA block |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 30 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Age: between 30 - 65
- American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status: I- III
- Body mass index: 18-35 kg.m-2
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patient Refusal
- Allergy to local anaesthetic agents.
- Skin infection at the site of injection.
- Coagulopathy.
- Diabetes Mellitus
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 |
|---|---|---|
| bilateral ESP blockbilateral ESP block with injection of 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine. | Other | group 1 |
| bilateral M-TAPA blockbilateral M-TAPA block with injection of 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine. | Other | group 2 |
Primary outcome
Time to First Analgesic request
Time frame: postoperative day 1
minutes
4 secondary outcomes
Total Nalbuphine consumption
Time frame: postoperative day 1
Visual analogue score
Time frame: postoperative day1
Quality of postoperative recovery
Time frame: postoperative day 1
Incidence of complications or adverse events
Time frame: postoperative day 5
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Jun 2026.
- Results publication: PubMed 30639940Tulgar S, Selvi O, Thomas DT, Deveci U, Ozer Z. Modified thoracoabdominal nerves block through perichondrial approach (M-TAPA) provides effective analgesia in abdominal surgery and is a choice for opioid sparing anesthesia. J Clin Anesth. 2019 Aug;55:109. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Jan 9. No abstract available.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Erector Spinae Block
Not yet recruiting
Lumbar Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus PENG Block for Hip Fracture Surgery
Femur Neck Fracture, Hip Fractures
Not yet recruiting
Intertransverse Process Block Versus Erector Spinae Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
Kidney Stones, Urolithiasis, Hypocitraturia, Pain, Postoperative
Not yet recruiting
ESP Versus SPSIP Block for Pain Relief After Shoulder Arthroscopy
Postoperative Pain
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block and Quadro-Iliac Plane Block in Elective Primary Unilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty
Postoperative Pain, Hip Arthroplasty, Total
Not yet recruiting
Erector Spinae Plane Block With or Without Thoracolumbar Fascia Injection for Chronic Low Back Pain
Chronic Low Back Pain
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.
sarah m elgamal, MD principal investigator
Alexandria 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 bilateral ESP block and bilateral M-TAPA block in people with Erector Spinae Block and Modified Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block, run by Alexandria University at 1 site in Egypt.
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 5 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Jun 2026. 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 Egypt. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact sarah m elgamal, MD (01005496440, sarahelgamal1990@yahoo.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time to First Analgesic request (time frame: postoperative day 1). 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 NCT07624058, 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 3 Jun 2026.