BILATERAL ERECTOR SPINAE PLANE BLOCK IN OPEN SPINAL FIXATION SURGERY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SAFETY AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.67214/za07yq95Keywords:
enhanced recovery after surgery, erector spinae plane block, fentanyl, multimodal analgesia, opioid consumptionAbstract
Objective: Open thoracic and lumbar spinal fixation surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain resulting from extensive tissue injury, muscle dissection, periosteal trauma, and instrumentation. Effective postoperative analgesia is essential for early mobilization and functional recovery. Regional anesthesia techniques have become increasingly important components of multimodal analgesic protocols aimed at reducing perioperative opioid exposure and opioid-related adverse effects. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety profile of bilateral erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in patients undergoing open thoracic and lumbar spinal fixation surgery.
Secondary objectives included assessment of intraoperative and postoperative opioid requirements, postoperative pain intensity during the first 48 hours, length of hospital stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting.
Materials and Methods: We performed a comparative clinical study involving 100 patients scheduled for open thoracic or lumbar spinal fixation surgery. Patients were divided into two groups, each comprising 50 patients.
The opioid group (OG) received intermittent fentanyl-based analgesia, whereas the ESPB group (ESPBG) underwent bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block with administration of 10 mL of 1% lidocaine and 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine on each side.
Postoperative pain intensity was assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 1, 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after surgery. Statistical analysis included Student’s t-test, Mann–Whitney U test, Pearson chi-square analysis, Cramer’s V coefficient, Friedman ANOVA, and Pearson correlation analysis.
Results: Compared with intermittent opioid analgesia, bilateral ESPB was associated with significantly lower fentanyl and tramadol consumption, lower postoperative pain scores, shorter hospital stay, and reduced incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.
No major block-related complications were observed.
Conclusion: Bilateral erector spinae plane block demonstrated a favorable safety profile and significant opioid-sparing effects in patients undergoing spinal fixation surgery. These findings support the incorporation of ESPB into multimodal analgesic protocols and enhanced recovery pathways.
Downloads
References
1. Kehlet H, Dahl JB. Anaesthesia, surgery and challenges in postoperative recovery. Lancet. 2003;362:1921-1928.
2. Chou R, Gordon DB, de Leon-Casasola OA, et al. Management of postoperative pain: clinical practice guidelines. J Pain. 2016;17(2):131-157.
3. Lavand’homme P. Transition from acute to chronic postsurgical pain. Pain. 2017;158(Suppl 1):S50-S54.
4. Kehlet H, Jensen TS, Woolf CJ. Persistent postsurgical pain: risk factors and prevention. Lancet. 2006;367:1618-1625.
5. Wu CL, Raja SN. Treatment of acute postoperative pain. Lancet. 2011;377:2215-2225.
6. Chin KJ. Regional anesthesia and enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. Can J Anesth. 2020.
7. Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC. Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(3):292-298. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4952.
8. Forero M, Adhikary SD, Lopez H, et al. The erector spinae plane block: a novel analgesic technique in thoracic neuropathic pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41(5):621-627.
9. Kot P, Rodriguez P, Granell M, et al. The erector spinae plane block: a narrative review. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2019;72(3):209-220.
10. Pawa A, King C, Thang C,et al. Erector spinae plane block: the ultimate “Plan A” block? Br J Anaesth. 2023;130(5):497-502.
11. Tulgar S, Senturk O, Selvi O, et al. Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block: indications and clinical applications. Cureus. 2018;10:e3294.
12. De Cassai A, Tonetti T. Local anesthetic spread during erector spinae plane block: a cadaveric study. J Clin Anesth. 2018.
13. Hamilton DL. The erector spinae plane block: mechanism of action and clinical implications. Anaesthesia. 2019.
14. Elsharkawy H, Pawa A, Mariano ER. Interfascial plane blocks: back to basics. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018;43:341-346.
15. Oh SK, Lim BG, Won YJ, et al . Analgesic efficacy of erector spinae plane block in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Anesth. 2022;78:110647.
16. Fu MY, et al. Efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block for lumbar spinal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Physician. 2023.
17. Wilson AA, et al. Erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain and opioid consumption after lumbar spine surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J. 2024.
18. Zhao D, et al. The efficacy of lumbar erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia in lumbar spine surgery. BMC Anesthesiol. 2024Chin KJ. Regional anesthesia and enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. Can J Anesth. 2020.
19. Chin KJ, Lewis S. Opioid-free analgesia for posterior spinal fusion surgery using erector spinae plane blocks in a multimodal anesthetic regimen. Spine. 2019;44(6):E379-E383.
20. Oezel L, et al. Procedure-specific complications associated with ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block in lumbar spine surgery.2022.
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 04-07-2026 (3)
- 03-07-2026 (2)
- 26-06-2026 (1)
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aleksandar Dimitrovski (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the Macedonian Journal of Anaesthesia the right of first publication.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Authors are permitted to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work, provided that its initial publication in this journal is acknowledged.
