Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Erector spinae plane block versus caudal block for postoperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Erector spinae plane block is a promising strategy for pain management in some settings. However, the effectiveness of erector spinae plane block versus caudal block in pediatric inguinal hernia repair has yet to be formally investigated.

METHODS: One hundred and two patients aged 2-5 years undergoing unilateral open inguinal hernia repair randomly received unilateral erector spinae plane block (0.2% ropivacaine 0.5 mL kg-1 ), caudal block (0.2% ropivacaine 1 mL kg-1 ), or no block. The primary outcome was time to the first rescue analgesia, defined as the interval from the end of surgery to the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability scale greater than three. Secondary outcomes included the number of patients requiring rescue analgesia, the area under the curve of pain scores over time, satisfaction of guardians, and adverse events.

RESULTS: The median time to the first rescue analgesia was longer in the erector spinae plane block group than in the caudal block group [10.0 h (interquartile range, 6.6-24.0 h) vs. 5.0 h (interquartile range, 2.9-7.3 h); p  < .001]. The Cox regression model demonstrated that the risk of postoperative rescue analgesia requirement was 0.38 in children receiving erector spinae plane block compared with caudal block (95% confidence interval 0.23-0.64; p  < .001). Additionally, the area under the curve of the pain scores over time was lower in the erector spinae plane block group than in the caudal block group (44.3 [36.6-50.7] vs. 59.0 [47.1-64.5]; p  < .001).

CONCLUSIONS: Erector spinae plane block provided superior postoperative analgesia compared to caudal block in children undergoing inguinal hernia repair. Trial registration : Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; ChiCTR2100048303.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app