摘要
Abstract
Study Design
Meta-analysis.
Objective
To compare the effectiveness of postoperative pain control between erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block in lumbar spine surgery.
Methods
PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched for articles containing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1900 and January 2024. We extracted the postoperative mean pain score, the first 24-h postoperative morphine consumption, and their standard deviation from the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using the functions available in the metafor package in R software. We pooled continuous variables using an inverse variance method with a random-effects model and summarized them as standardized mean differences.
Results
Five RCTs that directly compared the ESPB and TLIP block in lumbar spine surgery were included, enrolling 432 participants randomly into the two groups with 216 participants in each group. The pooled analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the ESPB and TLIP groups in terms of lower pain scores during the early (1 h) (standardized mean difference [SMD] −1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI], −3.10; 0.11), middle (12 h) (SMD −3.12, 95% CI, −6.86; 0.61), and late (24 h) (SMD −1.38, 95% CI, −3.01; 0.24) postoperative periods. There was also no significant difference in the first 24-h postoperative morphine equivalent consumption between the ESPB and TLIP groups (SMD −0.46 mg, 95% CI −1.23; 0.31).
Conclusion
No significant difference was observed between the ESPB and TLIP block in terms of postoperative pain control and 24-h morphine equivalent consumption for lumbar spine surgery.
Study Design
Meta-analysis.
Objective
To compare the effectiveness of postoperative pain control between erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block in lumbar spine surgery.
Methods
PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE electronic databases were searched for articles containing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1900 and January 2024. We extracted the postoperative mean pain score, the first 24-h postoperative morphine consumption, and their standard deviation from the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using the functions available in the metafor package in R software. We pooled continuous variables using an inverse variance method with a random-effects model and summarized them as standardized mean differences.
Results
Five RCTs that directly compared the ESPB and TLIP block in lumbar spine surgery were included, enrolling 432 participants randomly into the two groups with 216 participants in each group. The pooled analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the ESPB and TLIP groups in terms of lower pain scores during the early (1 h) (standardized mean difference [SMD] −1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI], −3.10; 0.11), middle (12 h) (SMD −3.12, 95% CI, −6.86; 0.61), and late (24 h) (SMD −1.38, 95% CI, −3.01; 0.24) postoperative periods. There was also no significant difference in the first 24-h postoperative morphine equivalent consumption between the ESPB and TLIP groups (SMD −0.46 mg, 95% CI −1.23; 0.31).
Conclusion
No significant difference was observed between the ESPB and TLIP block in terms of postoperative pain control and 24-h morphine equivalent consumption for lumbar spine surgery.
| 原文 | English |
|---|---|
| 期刊 | Global Spine Journal |
| DOIs | |
| 出版狀態 | Published - 2024 6月 24 |