4.6 Article

Erector Spinae Plane Block vs Quadratus Lumborum Block for pediatric lower abdominal surgery: A double blinded, prospective, and randomized trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA
Volume 57, Issue -, Pages 24-28

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2019.03.006

Keywords

Erector Spinae Plane Block; Quadratus Lumborum Block; Pediatric surgery; Ultrasound; Postoperative pain

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study objective: To evaluate and compare the analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block with ultrasound-guided Quadratus Lumborum Block in pediatric lower abdominal surgeries. Design: Randomized, prospective, double-blinded trial. Setting: Operating room and surgical ward. Patients: Sixty patients, aged 1 to 7 years with ASA scores of I-II scheduled for elective lower abdominal surgery were included in the study. Interventions: Patients were randomized into two groups as ESPB group and QLB group. Ultrasound guided ESP block at L1 vertebral level was performed preoperatively using 0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine (max 20 ml) to the patients in ESPB group. And ultrasound guided QLB block with transmuscular approach was performed pre-operatively using 0.5 ml/kg 0.25% bupivacaine (max 20 ml) to the patients in QLB group. Measurements: Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scores for pain were recorded at 0, 1, 3 and 6 h postoperatively. Analgesic requirements and time to first analgesic requirement were also recorded. Main results: Fifty-seven patients were included in the final analyses. No significant difference was determined between the groups' FLACC scores at 0, 1, 3 or 6 h postoperatively (p > 0.05). No significant difference was also determined in times to first analgesia between the groups (p > 0. 05). Conclusions: This study shows that the ESPB provides similar postoperative analgesia to the QLB in pediatric patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. Clinicians could decide according to their clinical experiences.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available