Abstract
Purpose
Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery is associated with significant postoperative pain. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) for analgesia after MIDCAB.
Methods
We conducted randomized controlled trial in 60 patients undergoing MIDCAB who received either a single-shot ESPB with 30 mL of ropivacaine 0.5% (ESPB group, n = 30) or normal saline 0.9% (control group, n = 30). The primary outcome was numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores at rest within 48 hr postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included postoperative NRS pain scores on deep inspiration within 48 hr, hydromorphone consumption, and quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) score at 24 and 48 hr.
Results
Compared with the control group, the ESPB group had lower NRS pain scores at rest at 6 hr (estimated mean difference, –2.1; 99% confidence interval [CI], –2.7 to –1.5; P < 0.001), 12 hr (–1.9; 99% CI, –2.6 to –1.2; P < 0.001), and 18 hr (–1.2; 99% CI, –1.8 to –0.6; P < 0.001) after surgery. The ESPB group also showed lower pain scores on deep inspiration at 6 hr (–2.9; 99% CI, –3.6 to –2.1; P < 0.001), 12 hr (–2.3; 99% CI, –3.1 to –1.5; P < 0.001), and 18 hr (–1.0; 99% CI, –1.8 to –0.2; P = 0.01) postoperatively. Patients in the ESPB group had lower total intraoperative fentanyl use, lower 24-hr hydromorphone consumption, a shorter time to extubation, and a shorter time to intensive care unit (ICU) discharge.
Conclusion
Erector spinae plane block provided early effective postoperative analgesia and reduced opioid consumption, time to extubation, and ICU discharge in patients undergoing MIDCAB.
Trial registration
www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100052810); registered 5 November 2021.
Résumé
Objectif
La chirurgie minimalement invasive de pontage aortocoronarien direct (MIDCAB) est associée à une douleur postopératoire importante. Notre objectif était d’étudier l’efficacité du bloc échoguidé du plan des muscles érecteurs du rachis (ESPB) pour l’analgésie après une MIDCAB.
Méthode
Nous avons réalisé une étude randomisée contrôlée chez 60 patient·es bénéficiant d’une MIDCAB et ayant reçu soit une dose unique d’ESPB avec 30 mL de ropivacaïne à 0,5 % (groupe ESPB, n = 30), soit une solution de normal salin à 0,9 % (groupe témoin, n = 30). Le critère d’évaluation principal était les scores de douleur au repos sur l’échelle d’évaluation numérique (EEN) dans les 48 heures postopératoires. Les critères d’évaluation secondaires comprenaient les scores de douleur postopératoires sur l’EEN en inspiration profonde dans les 48 heures, la consommation d’hydromorphone et le score de qualité de la récupération 15 (QoR-15) à 24 et 48 heures.
Résultats
Par rapport au groupe témoin, le groupe ESPB avait des scores de douleur au repos sur l’EEN plus faibles à 6 heures (différence moyenne estimée, −2,1; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 99 %, −2,7 à −1,5; P < 0,001), 12 h (−1,9; IC 99 %, −2,6 à −1,2; P < 0,001) et 18 h (−1,2; IC à 99 %, −1,8 à −0,6; P < 0,001) après la chirurgie. Le groupe ESPB a également affiché des scores de douleur plus faibles en inspiration profonde à 6 heures (−2,9; IC à 99 %, −3,6 à −2,1; P < 0,001), 12 h (−2,3; IC à 99 %, −3,1 à −1,5; P < 0,001) et 18 h (−1,0; IC à 99 %, −1,8 à −0,2; P = 0,01) postopératoire. Les patient·es du groupe ESPB avaient une consommation totale de fentanyl peropératoire plus faible, une consommation d’hydromorphone plus faible sur 24 heures, un délai d’extubation plus court et un délai plus court jusqu’au congé de l’unité de soins intensifs (USI).
Conclusion
Le bloc du plan des muscles érecteurs du rachis a fourni une analgésie postopératoire rapide et efficace et une réduction de la consommation d’opioïdes, du délai d’extubation et du congé de l’unité de soins intensifs chez les patient·es bénéficiant d’une MIDCAB.
Enregistrement de l’étude
www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100052810); enregistré le 5 novembre 2021.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery through an anterior-lateral mini-thoracotomy approach has become more common through the evolution of hybrid coronary revascularization with smaller skin incision compared with conventional midline sternotomy coronary artery bypass surgery.1, 2 This less-invasive approach aims to achieve early extubation, early mobilization, and rapid patient recovery with possibly no increased morbidity or mortality.3 Nevertheless, it can still result in substantial acute pain after surgery.4 A possible explanation for this pain is the intercostal nerve damage caused by thoracotomy, rib spreader, and placement of chest tubes. Poorly controlled acute pain may interfere with normal breathing and lead to severe postoperative pulmonary complications, extended intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and extended hospital length of stay.5, 6 Moreover, severe postoperative acute pain has been correlated with persistent postsurgical pain, which could affect the patient’s quality of life.7 Therefore, finding the optimum method for postoperative analgesia is of critical importance in patients undergoing MIDCAB.
Cardiac anesthesia has been based on high doses of opioids, to provide hemodynamic stability and adequate analgesia. Nevertheless, nausea and vomiting, urinary retention, respiratory depression, and other unwanted side effects may impede patient recovery.8 Although regional nerve blocks have been introduced as part of multimodal analgesia in many surgical settings, techniques such as thoracic epidural analgesia and paravertebral block are not routinely performed in cardiac surgery because of the need for heparinization, which may potentially increase the risk of serious bleeding or hematoma.9 Therefore, ultrasound-guided superficial interfascial plane blocks may be a possible alternative.10
Erector spinae plane blocks (ESPBs) are used in a variety of surgical settings and have been proven to reduce postoperative pain and improve quality of recovery.11,12,13,14 Nevertheless, to our knowledge, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the analgesic effects of ESPB in MIDCAB. The impact of ESPB on patient recovery remains unknown. We therefore hypothesized that ultrasound-guided ESPB could provide short-term analgesic benefits compared with placebo in patients undergoing MIDCAB.
Methods
Study design and population
The Review Board of Peking University People’s Hospital approved the study protocol (No. 2021PHB237-001). We prospectively registered the study prior to patient enrolment at the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (ChiCTR2100052810)Footnote 1 on 5 November 2021. This study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and the manuscript follows the guidelines of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT). Written informed consent was obtained from patients before participation in the study. The patients were allowed to withdraw their consent and cease participation in the study at any time.
The inclusion criteria were patients from 18 to 75 yr of either sex who were scheduled for MIDCAB. The exclusion criteria were a New York Heart Association functional classification of IV, a preoperative ejection fraction of < 40%, a body mass index of < 18 or > 35 kg·m−2, redo or emergency cases, coagulopathy, localized infection at the block site, allergy or intolerance to local anesthetics, hepatic or renal insufficiency, diagnosed mental disorder, history of chronic pain conditions requiring regular opioids, and refusal to participate.
After provision of written informed consent, 60 participants were enrolled in the study between November 2021 and June 2022.
Randomization and blinding
Randomization was conducted in a 1:1 ratio according to computer-generated randomized numbers. A nurse anesthetist who had no involvement in the collection of perioperative data or statistical analysis performed the randomization and sealed the group assignments in sequentially numbered opaque envelopes. The envelope was opened by the nurse anesthetist one hour before surgery and then a 30-mL syringe of the study medication was prepared according to the allocation number in the envelope. The patients randomly allocated to the ESPB group received 0.5% ropivacaine, whereas the control group received 0.9% normal saline. Both syringes were identical and labelled as “study medication” to ensure blinding. All patients, anesthesiologists who performed the block and provided patient care, nursing staff, cardiac surgeons, and investigators were unaware of the group allocations.
Interventions
All the ESPBs were performed by the same experienced attending anesthesiologist before general anesthesia induction. The patient was set in the right lateral position under sedation by iv midazolam (1–2 mg). After aseptic preparation of the skin area with chlorhexidine gluconate, a low-frequency linear transducer (Logiq™ e, GE HealthCare, Chicago, IL, USA) in a sterile cover was placed in the paramedian sagittal plane at the T5 level, approximately 2–3 cm lateral to the posterior midline. Then, the probe was adjusted to visualize the transverse process with acoustic shadow and the erector spinae muscle above it. A block needle (22G, 100 mm, Plexufix®, B. Braun SE, Melsungen, Germany) was then introduced from the cephalad to caudad under local anesthetic infiltration using the in-plane technique. The needle target was the interfascial space between the transverse process and erector spinae muscle. The correct placement of the needle tip was verified by 1–2 mL 0.9% saline, which was confirmed as interfascial spread of injectate lifting the erector spinae muscle. Then, 30 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine or 0.9% normal saline was injected.
Perioperative management
Patients were monitored with 5-lead electrocardiogram, pulse oxygen saturation, and invasive blood pressure monitoring. General anesthesia induction included a combination of iv midazolam (0.03–0.05 mg·kg−1), etomidate (0.15–0.2 mg·kg−1), cis-atracurium (0.15–0.2 mg·kg−1), and fentanyl (3–5 µg·kg−1). Then, a left-side double-lumen tube with appropriate size was inserted. After induction, a 7-Fr central venous catheter with triple-lumen was placed under ultrasound guidance. Propofol (3–5 mg·kg−1·hr−1), cisatracurium (0.1–0.2 mg·kg−1·hr−1), and dexmedetomidine (0.5–0.8 µg·kg−1·hr−1) were used for anesthesia maintenance to achieve a bispectral index between 40 and 60. In case of hypertension (defined as a blood pressure > 20% of baseline value), the anesthesia depth of the patient was checked, then propofol infusion rate was adjusted and/or fentanyl boluses (1–2 µg·kg−1) were administered by the attending anesthesiologist. A phenylephrine or dopamine bolus and/or infusion was used if the blood pressure was < 20% of the baseline value though decreasing propofol infusion rate or fluid volume loading was applied. No other opioids except fentanyl were used during surgery. The anesthesiologists who provided intraoperative care were not otherwise involved in the data collection for this study.
All iv anesthetic infusions were stopped once surgery was completed, and the patient was transferred to the cardiac ICU. The medical staff in the ICU performed extubation once the patient fulfilled weaning criteria. No analgesic infusions were administered in the cardiac ICU until the patient was extubated.
Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with iv hydromorphone was prescribed with no basal infusion and an intermittent bolus dose of 0.2 mg and a lock-out period of ten minutes. Intravenous tropisetron 5 mg was given to all patients after completion of surgery. After being transferred to the ward, further analgesic treatment with oxycodone and acetaminophen was prescribed if necessary.
Surgical procedure
The same cardiac surgical team performed all the procedures. Thoracotomy was performed with the patient positioned supine and the left shoulder elevated at 30°, then a 5–6-cm curvilinear incision was performed between the fourth and fifth ribs on the left anterolateral chest wall. The internal mammary artery was obtained using a retractor system via direct vision. With the employment of Octopus® Nuvo Tissue Stabilizer (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) and Starfish™ NS Heart Positioner (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) to achieve stabilization, the anastomosis between the distal graft and the target vessel was performed on the beating heart.15
Outcomes
Our primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores at rest within 48 hr postoperatively (i.e., after skin closure; assessed at six hours, 12 hr [used for sample size calculation; cf. Statistical analysis below], 18 hr, 24 hr, and 48 hr). The secondary outcomes were NRS pain scores on deep inspiration at the same time points after skin closure, postoperative hydromorphone consumption, and quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores at 24 hr and 48 hr after surgery. Other outcomes included total fentanyl use, time to tracheal extubation and chest tube removal after surgery, ICU length of stay, and time to hospital discharge. Adverse events including postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), atrial fibrillation, pleural effusion, pericarditis, and block-related complications such as hematoma, pneumothorax, infection, and 30-day mortality were recorded.
The magnitude of postoperative pain was evaluated at six hours, 12 hr, 18 hr, 24 hr, and 48 hr by a follow-up investigator who was blinded to the study group allocations using the NRS score (0 = no pain, while 10 = worst pain ever). Analgesic consumption and the QoR-15 score were collected at 24 hr and 48 hr after surgery. We used the Chinese version of the QoR-15 questionnaire as a patient-centred measurement of recovery quality. This questionnaire contains the following domains: physical comfort and independence, pain, psychological state, and emotional state.16 A QoR-15 score of 0 represents poor recovery while a score of 150 represents excellent recovery. Adverse events, postoperative complications, and patient progression were traced by visiting the patients daily or reviewing electronic medical records during their entire hospital stay. A telephone interview was performed at one month after surgery to assess 30-day mortality.
Statistical analysis
The sample size was calculated with PASS power analysis and sample size software (NCSS LLC., Kaysville, UT, USA). Based on results from a pilot study of ten patients, the mean and standard deviation (SD) of postoperative NRS scores at 12 hr in patients using iv hydromorphone PCA were 3.7 and 1.9, respectively. Thus, to identify a relevant clinical difference of 1.5 in the NRS score with a two-sided 5% significance level, 23 patients were calculated in each group to have 90% power using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) method with five observations on the same subject. Autocorrelation between repeated observations on each subject was assumed to be 0.6. Considering possible dropouts, we increased the sample size to 30 patients for each study group.
Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows version 24.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Before analysis, the Shapiro–Wilk test was employed to analyze the normality of data distribution. Continuous data are presented as mean (SD) or median [interquartile range (IQR)]. Dichotomous and polytomous data are presented as counts and percentages. For NRS scores, between-group differences at all time points after surgery were analyzed using two-way repeated measures ANOVA with Bonferroni correction. Confidence intervals (CIs) and P values are reported after Bonferroni adjustment for the 5-time comparisons, so are presented as 99% CIs. For the other outcomes, the Mann–Whitney U test or independent samples t test was adopted to compare continuous variables. Categorical data were analyzed by the Chi square or Fisher's exact test when necessary. All P values were two sided and an adjusted P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for the primary outcomes. For secondary outcomes, a P < 0.05 was considered significant.
Results
Seventy-one patients were initially screened for eligibility from November 2021 to June 2022. Ten patients did not fit the inclusion criteria and one refused to participate. Finally, data of 60 patients were collected (Fig. 1). Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics and perioperative data for the two study groups.
For NRS scores, repeated measures ANOVA showed significant interaction between treatment groups and time both at rest and on deep inspiration (both P < 0.001). Patients in the ESPB group reported lower NRS pain scores at rest than the control group at six hours, 12 hr, and 18 hr postoperatively (Table 2, Fig. 2A). Numerical rating scale pain scores on deep inspiration were also lower in the ESPB group at six hours, 12 hr, and 18 hr (Table 2, Fig. 2B). There were no statistical differences between groups in NRS scores at rest and on deep inspiration at 24 hr and 48 hr .
Compared with placebo, cumulative hydromorphone consumption at 24 hr and total intraoperative fentanyl use were significantly reduced by ESPB (P = 0.04 and P = 0.004, respectively; Table 2). Patients in the ESPB group also had a shorter time to tracheal extubation and ICU discharge. We observed a lower incidence of PONV on postoperative day 1 in the ESPB group than in the control group (P = 0.001).
We did not find any statistically significant differences between the groups regarding PCA hydromorphone consumption at 48 hr, QoR-15 scores, time to chest tube removal, and hospital discharge (Table 2). The rate of adverse events was low and comparable between the two groups with no block-related complications reported. No participants died within 30 days.
Discussion
In this double-blind RCT, we found that a single-shot ESPB reduced NRS scores at rest and on deep inspiration during the first 18 hr after MIDCAB compared with saline placebo. Erector spinae plane blockade also significantly reduced perioperative opioid consumption, time to tracheal extubation, and time to ICU discharge. Our findings indicate that ESPB may be an effective approach to provide early analgesia in MIDCAB surgery.
A sensory blockade of thoracic intercostal nerves could provide pain relief for anterolateral incision of the chest wall. Nevertheless, multiple intercostal nerve block injections may be required to cover the extensive surgical field.17 Furthermore, the coagulation issues associated with thoracic epidural analgesia and paravertebral block make them a less preferred choice in cardiovascular surgeries. Thus, the ease of performance, real-time visualization under ultrasound-guidance, and decreased risk of hematoma and local anesthetic toxicity makes ESPB a reasonable alternative for analgesia after MIDCAB.
An RCT by Fiorelli et al. compared single-shot ESPB with intercostal nerve block in patients undergoing mini-thoracotomy.18 The static and dynamic NRS scores were significantly lower in the ESPB group than the intercostal nerve block group at all time points in the 48-hr follow-up period. Nevertheless, differences between both resting and dynamic NRS scores in our study start to become nonsignificant after 18 hr. The difference in our findings may be attributed to different procedures (lung resection vs MIDCAB) or to the higher concentration of local anesthetic (ropivacaine 0.75%) used by Fiorelli et al. compared with ropivacaine 0.5% used in our study.
Continuous infusion or intermittent bolus of ESPB through a catheter has been reported in several studies.19,20,21 Duration of analgesia after a single-shot ESPB may depend on the concentration and absorption of the local anesthetics, but can be prolonged with a catheter.22 Moreover, the use of intermittent bolus administration of local anesthetics may achieve better analgesia than a continuous infusion.23 On the other hand, the catheter technique is more resource intensive.21 The ESPB catheter is a relatively new technique and we do not have much experience with it in our centre; therefore, we adopted a single-shot ESPB in this study.24
In cardiac surgery, the use of multimodal analgesia may reduce opioid use. A previous work showed that intraoperative opioid consumption was inversely associated with the number of interventions used perioperatively. In particular, dexmedetomidine, regional analgesia, and preoperative gabapentin were independent factors associated with low opioid administration.25 We used intraoperative dexmedetomidine and regional nerve blockade in our study to reduce opioid use.
In a before-and-after study, opioid-sparing analgesia with continuous ESPB decreased perioperative opioid consumption in open cardiac surgery with a fast-track recovery protocol.26 Median [IQR] morphine consumption in the initial 48 hr after surgery was 0 [0–0] mg in patients receiving an ESPB. Unfortunately, an enhanced recovery program has not been applied for cardiac surgery in our centre. In addition, this outcome could be influenced by variability in patient compliance, different surgical types, or other unmeasured confounders.
Borys et al. compared single-shot ESPB with no block in patients undergoing mitral and/or tricuspid valve repair via right mini-thoracotomy.27 Similar to our study, fewer days in the ICU were observed in the ESPB group. Nevertheless, they did not find a statistically significant difference in total postoperative oxycodone use during the first 24 hr period between the ESPB and the control group.
Our study has several limitations. First, we did not test the dermatomal distribution of ESPB by thermal or pinprick testing to avoid unblinding of the study personnel. Nevertheless, there are still controversies on the ESPB mechanisms of action and anatomical spread. A study of healthy volunteers has suggested that the ventral branches of spinal nerves were not blocked.28 A recent magnetic resonance imaging study has also shown that the injectate spread to the paravertebral space and the sympathetic chain was highly variable.29 Second, as a relatively novel block, the optimal dosing regimens of ESPB have not been established. The literature describes volumes from 20 to 30 mL. We chose a high concentration of ropivacaine 0.5% with a volume of 30 mL to provide adequate block effect. In the present study, patients in ESPB group did not present significant hypotension or bradycardia, which suggests that using a high concentration of ropivacaine is not a major risk in those patients. Third, preoperative gabapentin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as acetaminophen and ketorolac have been used as supplements to reduce opioid consumption after cardiac surgery.30, 31 Nevertheless, those medications are not routinely used in cardiac surgery in our centre. Although this study does not reflect the current standard practice of multimodal analgesia, it actually allows the investigators to tease out a more accurate estimate of the analgesic effect of ESPB in MIDCAB. Fourth, the anesthesiologists providing intraoperative care might have been aware of the group allocation because of the difference in intraoperative fentanyl dosage. Hence, risk of bias due to a possibility of unblinding should be taken into consideration. Nevertheless, all the intraoperative care providers were not involved in outcome assessment, data collection, or data analysis. Fifth, we did not ask about chronic postthoracotomy pain in our patients. Finally, this is a single-centre study, which may not represent practice at other centres.
In conclusion, the results of our study suggest that single-shot ESPB can reduce postoperative pain scores during the first 18 hr, decrease perioperative opioid consumption, and shorten time to tracheal extubation and ICU discharge in patients undergoing MIDCAB surgery.
Notes
The trial was registered at: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=136409.
References
Repossini A, Di Bacco L, Nicoli F, et al. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass: twenty-year experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2019; 158: 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.11.149
Kikuchi K, Mori M. Less-invasive coronary artery bypass grafting international landscape and progress. Curr Opin Cardiol 2017; 32: 715–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/hco.0000000000000461
Maj G, Regesta T, Campanella A, Cavozza C, Parodi G, Audo A. Optimal management of patients treated with minimally invasive cardiac surgery in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery and fast-track protocols: a narrative review. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2022; 36: 766–75. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2021.02.035
Hazelrigg SR, Cetindag IB, Fullerton J. Acute and chronic pain syndromes after thoracic surgery. Surg Clin North Am 2002; 82: 849–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0039-6109(02)00031-2
Bignami E, Castella A, Pota V, et al. Perioperative pain management in cardiac surgery: a systematic review. Minerva Anestesiol 2018; 84: 488–503. https://doi.org/10.23736/s0375-9393.17.12142-5
Ibañez J, Riera M, Amezaga R, et al. Long-term mortality after pneumonia in cardiac surgery patients: a propensity-matched analysis. J Intensive Care Med 2016; 31: 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885066614523918
Choinière M, Watt-Watson J, Victor JC, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for persistent postoperative nonanginal pain after cardiac surgery: a 2-year prospective multicentre study. CMAJ 2014; 186: E213–23. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.131012
Kwanten LE, O’Brien B, Anwar S. Opioid-based anesthesia and analgesia for adult cardiac surgery: history and narrative review of the literature. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2019; 33: 808–16. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2018.05.053
Allen DJ, Chae-Kim SH, Trousdale DM. Risks and complications of neuraxial anesthesia and the use of anticoagulation in the surgical patient. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2002; 15: 369–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2002.11927867
Kelava M, Alfirevic A, Bustamante S, Hargrave J, Marciniak D. Regional anesthesia in cardiac surgery: an overview of fascial plane chest wall blocks. Anesth Analg 2020; 131: 127–35. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000004682
Singh S, Choudhary NK, Lalin D, Verma VK. Bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgery: a randomized control trial. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2020; 32: 330–4. https://doi.org/10.1097/ana.0000000000000603
Canıtez A, Kozanhan B, Aksoy N, Yildiz M, Tutar MS. Effect of erector spinae plane block on the postoperative quality of recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective double-blind study. Br J Anaesth 2021; 127: 629–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2021.06.030
Finnerty DT, McMahon A, McNamara JR, Hartigan SD, Griffin M, Buggy DJ. Comparing erector spinae plane block with serratus anterior plane block for minimally invasive thoracic surgery: a randomised clinical trial. Br J Anaesth 2020; 125: 802–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2020.06.020
Gürkan Y, Aksu C, Kuş A, Yörükoğlu UH. Erector spinae plane block and thoracic paravertebral block for breast surgery compared to IV-morphine: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Anesth 2020; 59: 84–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.06.036
Ling Y, Bao L, Yang W, Chen Y, Gao Q. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting with an improved rib spreader and a new-shaped cardiac stabilizer: results of 200 consecutive cases in a single institution. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2016; 16: 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-016-0216-4
Bu XS, Zhang J, Zuo YX. Validation of the Chinese version of the quality of Recovery-15 score and its comparison with the post-operative quality recovery scale. Patient 2016; 9: 251–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-015-0148-6
Yu S, Valencia MB, Roques V, Aljure OD. Regional analgesia for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. J Card Surg 2019; 34: 1289–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.14177
Fiorelli S, Leopizzi G, Menna C, et al. Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus intercostal nerve block for post-minithoracotomy acute pain management: a randomized controlled trial. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2020; 34: 2421–9. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2020.01.026
Muñoz-Leyva F, Chin KJ, Mendiola WE, et al. Bilateral continuous erector spinae plane (ESP) blockade for perioperative opioid-sparing in median sternotomy. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2019; 33: 1698–703. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2018.05.047
Adhikary SD, Prasad A, Soleimani B, Chin KJ. Continuous erector spinae plane block as an effective analgesic option in anticoagulated patients after left ventricular assist device implantation: a case series. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2019; 33: 1063–7. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2018.04.026
Sun Y, Luo X, Yang X, et al. Benefits and risks of intermittent bolus erector spinae plane block through a catheter for patients after cardiac surgery through a lateral mini-thoracotomy: a propensity score matched retrospective cohort study. J Clin Anesth 2021; 75: 110489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110489
Tsui BC, Navaratnam M, Boltz G, et al. Bilateral automatized intermittent bolus erector spinae plane analgesic blocks for sternotomy in a cardiac patient who underwent cardiopulmonary bypass: a new era of cardiac regional anesthesia. J Clin Anesth 2018; 48: 9–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.04.005
Ilfeld BM. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks: an update of the published evidence and comparison with novel, alternative analgesic modalities. Anesth Analg 2017; 124: 308–35. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000001581
Balan C, Bubenek-Turconi SI, Tomescu DR, Valeanu L. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia-current strategies for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery. Medicina (Kaunas) 2021; 57: 312. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina57040312
Grant MC, Isada T, Ruzankin P, et al. Opioid-sparing cardiac anesthesia: secondary analysis of an enhanced recovery program for cardiac surgery. Anesth Analg 2020; 131: 1852–61. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0000000000005152
Macaire P, Ho N, Nguyen T, et al. Ultrasound-guided continuous thoracic erector spinae plane block within an enhanced recovery program is associated with decreased opioid consumption and improved patient postoperative rehabilitation after open cardiac surgery—a patient-matched, controlled before-and-after study. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2019; 33: 1659–67. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2018.11.021
Borys M, Gawda B, Horeczy B, et al. Erector-spinae plane block as an analgesic alternative in patients undergoing mitral and/or tricuspid valve repair through a right mini-thoracotomy—an observational cohort study. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 2020; 15: 208–14. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.85396
Zhang J, He Y, Wang S, et al. The erector spinae plane block causes only cutaneous sensory loss on ipsilateral posterior thorax: a prospective observational volunteer study. BMC Anesthesiol 2020; 20: 88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-01002-0
Schwartzmann A, Peng P, Maciel MA, Alcarraz P, Gonzalez X, Forero M. A magnetic resonance imaging study of local anesthetic spread in patients receiving an erector spinae plane block. Can J Anesth 2020; 67: 942–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-020-01613-8
Wasfy SF, Kamhawy GA, Omar AH, Abd El Aziza HF. Bilateral continuous erector spinae block versus multimodal intravenous analgesia in coronary bypass surgery. A randomized trial. Egypt J Anaesth 2021; 37: 152–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/11101849.2021.1904548
Ucak A, Onan B, Sen H, Selcuk I, Turan A, Yilmaz AT. The effects of gabapentin on acute and chronic postoperative pain after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2011; 25: 824–9. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2010.11.017
Author contributions
Ling Xin conceptualized the study and wrote the protocol, performed data analysis, and drafted the manuscript. Lu Wang performed data acquisition, participated in statistical analysis, and drafted the manuscript. Yi Feng designed the study and revised the manuscript.
Acknowledgements
We thank all our anesthesiologist colleagues and our cardiac surgical team for their cooperation and support in facilitating this study.
Disclosures
None.
Funding statement
This work was supported by Peking University People’s Hospital (2021-Z-87).
Editorial responsibility
This submission was handled by Dr. Vishal Uppal, Associate Editor, Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d’anesthésie.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is accompanied by an Editorial. Please see Can J Anesth 2023; https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-023-02636-7.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Xin, L., Wang, L. & Feng, Y. Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth 71, 784–792 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-023-02637-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-023-02637-6