Clinical trial NCT03758261: Erector Spinae Plane vs. Paravertebral Nerve Block for Thoracic Surgery
Official title: Randomized Clinical Trial of Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) Versus Paravertebral Nerve (PVB) Blockade for Video Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS)
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: PHASE4
Conditions: Thoracic Surgical Procedures
Keywords: VATS
Regional Anesthesia
Paravertebral nerve block
Erector Spinae nerve block
Video assisted thoracoscopic surgery
Lead sponsor: University of Pittsburgh
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2018-11-29
Enrollment: 35
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: yes
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Intervention model description: 2 groups of patients will be studied simultaneously. One group will have the intervention of the nerve block in the erector spinae approach and the other group will have the nerve block in the traditional paravertebral approach.
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: Continuous paravertebral analgesia and erector spinae plane blockade (ESP) are accepted techniques at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) for the management of thoracic pain following surgery and trauma. Recently, an increasing number of erector spinae plane nerve blocks are being performed as it has been demonstrated in our institution, and via case reports that the blocks provide clinical effectiveness, but may have a better side-effect profile than the paravertebral nerve block. However, the relative efficacy of ESP compared to paravertebral nerve block remains to be established for video assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). This is a prospective randomized study intended to assess the efficacy, safety and side-effect profile of continuous erector spinae plane analgesia versus continuous paravertebral analgesia for VATS procedures. It will include 60 patients presenting to UPMC Passavant for a VATS procedure. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either a nerve block via continuous paravertebral infusion or via erector spinae plane infusion. In addition, to treat breakthrough pain, the patients in both arms will receive multimodal adjunctive therapy per routine. Bupivacaine and ropivacaine are FDA approved for use in nerve block catheters. The primary outcome will be to compare analgesic efficacy between the two nerve blocks as defined by total opioid consumption and pain scores on the numeric pain rating scale. Secondary outcomes include incentive spirometer amounts (baseline vs daily score postoperatively), length of stay, duration of catheter and report of adverse events or complications. Other data points include number of chest tubes and location and level of catheter and nerve block placement as well as number of blocks per case.

Detailed description: Background and significance:

Multimodal analgesia for thoracic surgery is key to allow faster recovery and diminish postoperative complications. Paravertebral nerve blocks as well as epidurals are among the regional anesthetic techniques utilized for these procedures. Recently, a newer technique, the erector spinae plane block, has been used and described to be effective in treating pain for patients undergoing thoracic surgery. At UPMC, the investigators have had clinically significant pain control for thoracic surgery with both types of blocks. The previous case reports/series and our clinical observation has led us to propose this study of comparing the clinical efficacy of erector spinae plane block vs. paravertebral nerve block.

Though ESP and paravertebral blocks have been documented to be efficacious for this procedure, there has been no direct comparison between the two approaches. The ESP block is considered to be a safer technique with less theoretical adverse events possible and thus, would become a viable alternative to the more technically challenging paravertebral nerve block. If ESP is found to be superior or non-inferior to paravertebral in terms of pain management and safety, this would be a major finding, as ESP is considered safer and technically easier to perform than paravertebral nerve block.

Study design and methods

The investigators present a prospective randomized trial comparing the efficacy of continuous paravertebral nerve blocks vs. ESP blocks for video assisted thoracoscopy surgery (VATS) at UPMC Passavant.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion criteria:

* Patients undergoing VATS agreeable to have a nerve block as analgesic technique
* Age: 18 years old and older.
* ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists Class) I-IV

Exclusion criteria:

* Cognitive impairment that would not allow effective nerve block placement or gathering information related to the study (ex. pain score).
* Contraindications for nerve block placement such as coagulopathy, use of clopidogrel in the past 48hs, patients on dual antiplatelet therapy, infection at the site of puncture, patient refusal, allergy to local anesthetics.
* Chronic opiate consumption
* Patient expected to be on therapeutic anticoagulation post procedure.
* Pregnancy
* Comorbid conditions: Any comorbid condition that in the judgment of the anesthesiologist would preclude the patient from any aspect of the study (ex. sepsis, possibly abnormalities of the thoracic spine or paravertebral anatomy such as neoplastic mass occupying the space, empyema, increased intracranial pressure)

Primary outcomes:
measure: Total Opioid Consumption
timeFrame: 1 day post catheter removal
measure: Patient Reported Pain Scores
timeFrame: 1 day post catheter removal
Secondary outcomes:
measure: Amount Achieved on Incentive Spirometer
timeFrame: 1 day post catheter removal
measure: Length of Hospital Stay
timeFrame: Up to 2 weeks on average
measure: Time Catheter Remains Inserted in Body
timeFrame: 6 days
measure: Averaged Total of Narcotic Usage
timeFrame: 0-120 hours post-operative
measure: Report of Adverse Events From Catheter Placement
timeFrame: 1 day post catheter removal
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Pittsburgh
country: United States
facility: UPMC Passavant
state: Pennsylvania
Study officials:
affiliation: University of Pittsburgh
name: Charles Luke, MD
role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
References:
citation: D'Ercole F, Arora H, Kumar PA. Paravertebral Block for Thoracic Surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2018 Apr;32(2):915-927. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2017.10.003. Epub 2017 Oct 4.
citation: Yeung JH, Gates S, Naidu BV, Wilson MJ, Gao Smith F. Paravertebral block versus thoracic epidural for patients undergoing thoracotomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 21;2(2):CD009121. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009121.pub2.
citation: Tsui BCH, Fonseca A, Munshey F, McFadyen G, Caruso TJ. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block: A pooled review of 242 cases. J Clin Anesth. 2019 Mar;53:29-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.09.036. Epub 2018 Oct 3.
citation: Hamilton DL, Manickam B. Erector spinae plane block for pain relief in rib fractures. Br J Anaesth. 2017 Mar 1;118(3):474-475. doi: 10.1093/bja/aex013. No abstract available.
citation: Ueshima H, Otake H. RETRACTED: Clinical experiences of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block for thoracic vertebra surgery. J Clin Anesth. 2017 May;38:137. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.12.028. Epub 2017 Feb 17. No abstract available.
citation: Luis-Navarro JC, Seda-Guzman M, Luis-Moreno C, Lopez-Romero JL. The erector spinae plane block in 4 cases of video-assisted thoracic surgery. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim (Engl Ed). 2018 Apr;65(4):204-208. doi: 10.1016/j.redar.2017.12.004. Epub 2018 Jan 11. English, Spanish.