Çağrı Erdim, Mehmet Hamza Türkcanoğlu, Rabia Deniz, Hamit Özgül, Zöhre Okur, Tevfik Güzelbey, Mustafa Fatih Arslan, Özgür Kılıçkesmez
{"title":"Erector Spinae Plane Block for Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage: A Comparative Analysis.","authors":"Çağrı Erdim, Mehmet Hamza Türkcanoğlu, Rabia Deniz, Hamit Özgül, Zöhre Okur, Tevfik Güzelbey, Mustafa Fatih Arslan, Özgür Kılıçkesmez","doi":"10.1007/s00270-025-04108-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is associated with significant procedural pain, typically managed with opioid-based sedation, which carries risks such as respiratory depression, nausea, and hemodynamic instability. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has emerged as an opioid-sparing alternative for perioperative pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ESPB compared to procedural analgesia with fentanyl (PAF) in PTBD patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent PTBD with ESPB or PAF were assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at five time points: pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and 1, 6, and 12 h post-procedure. Opioid consumption and procedure-related complications were also recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>101 patients who underwent PTBD with either pre-procedural ESPB (n = 41) or PAF (n = 60) were included. The ESPB group demonstrated significantly lower median pain scores at 1 h (3 vs. 6, p < 0.001), 6 h (2 vs. 4, p < 0.001), and 12 h (1 vs. 2, p < 0.001) post-procedure compared to the PAF group. Although intra-procedural pain scores were comparable between the two groups, patients in the ESPB group experienced a more rapid decline in post-procedural pain, returning to near-baseline levels at 1 h, whereas pain in the PAF group remained elevated (p < 0.001). No patients in the ESPB group required additional opioid analgesia post-procedure, whereas tramadol was administered in the PAF group as needed for breakthrough pain (NRS ≥ 6).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESPB provides effective analgesia for PTBD, minimizing opioid use while enhancing patient comfort and procedural success.</p>","PeriodicalId":9591,"journal":{"name":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-025-04108-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) is associated with significant procedural pain, typically managed with opioid-based sedation, which carries risks such as respiratory depression, nausea, and hemodynamic instability. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has emerged as an opioid-sparing alternative for perioperative pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ESPB compared to procedural analgesia with fentanyl (PAF) in PTBD patients.
Methods: Patients who underwent PTBD with ESPB or PAF were assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at five time points: pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and 1, 6, and 12 h post-procedure. Opioid consumption and procedure-related complications were also recorded.
Results: 101 patients who underwent PTBD with either pre-procedural ESPB (n = 41) or PAF (n = 60) were included. The ESPB group demonstrated significantly lower median pain scores at 1 h (3 vs. 6, p < 0.001), 6 h (2 vs. 4, p < 0.001), and 12 h (1 vs. 2, p < 0.001) post-procedure compared to the PAF group. Although intra-procedural pain scores were comparable between the two groups, patients in the ESPB group experienced a more rapid decline in post-procedural pain, returning to near-baseline levels at 1 h, whereas pain in the PAF group remained elevated (p < 0.001). No patients in the ESPB group required additional opioid analgesia post-procedure, whereas tramadol was administered in the PAF group as needed for breakthrough pain (NRS ≥ 6).
Conclusion: ESPB provides effective analgesia for PTBD, minimizing opioid use while enhancing patient comfort and procedural success.
期刊介绍:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology (CVIR) is the official journal of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, and is also the official organ of a number of additional distinguished national and international interventional radiological societies. CVIR publishes double blinded peer-reviewed original research work including clinical and laboratory investigations, technical notes, case reports, works in progress, and letters to the editor, as well as review articles, pictorial essays, editorials, and special invited submissions in the field of vascular and interventional radiology. Beside the communication of the latest research results in this field, it is also the aim of CVIR to support continuous medical education. Articles that are accepted for publication are done so with the understanding that they, or their substantive contents, have not been and will not be submitted to any other publication.