Efficacy of erector spinae plane block versus caudal block for postoperative analgesia in paediatric surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-10 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_1249_24
Raksha Kundal, Ankita Mahajan, Uppu Praveen, Medha Shukla, Vijay Kundal, Sunana Gupta
{"title":"Efficacy of erector spinae plane block versus caudal block for postoperative analgesia in paediatric surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Raksha Kundal, Ankita Mahajan, Uppu Praveen, Medha Shukla, Vijay Kundal, Sunana Gupta","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_1249_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Regional anaesthesia is a component of multimodal analgesia in paediatric surgery, providing effective pain relief. Traditional techniques, such as the caudal block (CB) and, more recently, fascial plane blocks, such as the erector spinae plane block (ESPB), have gained popularity. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares CB and ESPB in paediatric surgeries involving the lower abdomen or lower limbs. It aims to clarify mixed outcomes from recent trials regarding the variability in analgesic efficacy of both techniques for future practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review, registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), includes eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing postoperative analgesia between ESPB and CB in paediatric lower abdominal or lower limb surgeries. We searched the ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Scopus, ProQuest, and PubMed databases. The meta-analysis assessed the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesia and postoperative pain intensity. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were applied to assess the quality of evidence.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Eight RCTs (575 patients) were included in the review. A meta-analysis of four RCTs (217 patients) showed no statistically significant difference (inconclusive) between ESPB and CB groups regarding the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesia [Relative Risk (RR) =0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29, 2.40, <i>P</i> = 0.73], while six RCTs (360 patients) found lower pain intensity score (standardised mean difference = -0.37; 95% CI: -0.71, -0.02; <i>P</i> = 0.04) in the ESPB group when compared to CB group. Both outcomes exhibited considerable heterogeneity (I² = 88% for rescue analgesia; I² = 62% for pain intensity), further emphasising the robustness of the findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We conclude that ESPB provides better postoperative analgesia than CB in children undergoing lower abdominal or lower limb surgeries. ESPB reduces postoperative pain intensity scores and analgesic requirements compared to CB.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"69 8","pages":"759-769"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12338468/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_1249_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: Regional anaesthesia is a component of multimodal analgesia in paediatric surgery, providing effective pain relief. Traditional techniques, such as the caudal block (CB) and, more recently, fascial plane blocks, such as the erector spinae plane block (ESPB), have gained popularity. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares CB and ESPB in paediatric surgeries involving the lower abdomen or lower limbs. It aims to clarify mixed outcomes from recent trials regarding the variability in analgesic efficacy of both techniques for future practices.

Methods: This review, registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), includes eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing postoperative analgesia between ESPB and CB in paediatric lower abdominal or lower limb surgeries. We searched the ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, Scopus, ProQuest, and PubMed databases. The meta-analysis assessed the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesia and postoperative pain intensity. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were applied to assess the quality of evidence.

Result: Eight RCTs (575 patients) were included in the review. A meta-analysis of four RCTs (217 patients) showed no statistically significant difference (inconclusive) between ESPB and CB groups regarding the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesia [Relative Risk (RR) =0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29, 2.40, P = 0.73], while six RCTs (360 patients) found lower pain intensity score (standardised mean difference = -0.37; 95% CI: -0.71, -0.02; P = 0.04) in the ESPB group when compared to CB group. Both outcomes exhibited considerable heterogeneity (I² = 88% for rescue analgesia; I² = 62% for pain intensity), further emphasising the robustness of the findings.

Conclusion: We conclude that ESPB provides better postoperative analgesia than CB in children undergoing lower abdominal or lower limb surgeries. ESPB reduces postoperative pain intensity scores and analgesic requirements compared to CB.

竖脊肌平面阻滞与尾侧阻滞对小儿手术术后镇痛的疗效:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:区域麻醉是儿科手术中多模式镇痛的一个组成部分,提供有效的疼痛缓解。传统的技术,如尾侧阻滞(CB)和最近的筋膜平面阻滞,如竖脊平面阻滞(ESPB),已经得到了普及。本系统综述和荟萃分析比较了CB和ESPB在涉及下腹或下肢的儿科手术中的应用。它的目的是澄清最近的试验关于两种技术的镇痛效果的可变性的混合结果,为未来的实践。方法:本综述在国际前瞻性系统评价注册(PROSPERO)上注册,包括8项随机对照试验(rct),比较ESPB和CB在儿科下腹部或下肢手术中的术后镇痛。我们检索了ScienceDirect、b谷歌Scholar、Scopus、ProQuest和PubMed数据库。meta分析评估了需要抢救性镇痛的患者比例和术后疼痛强度。评估、发展和评价(GRADE)指南用于评估证据的质量。结果:8项rct(575例患者)纳入本综述。4项随机对照试验(217例)的荟萃分析显示,ESPB组和CB组之间需要紧急镇痛的患者比例差异无统计学意义(不确定)[相对风险(RR) =0.83, 95%可信区间(CI): 0.29, 2.40, P = 0.73],而6项随机对照试验(360例)发现疼痛强度评分较低(标准化平均差异= -0.37;95% ci: -0.71, -0.02;P = 0.04)。两种结果均表现出相当大的异质性(I²= 88%);疼痛强度I²= 62%),进一步强调了研究结果的稳健性。结论:我们认为ESPB在儿童下腹或下肢手术后的镇痛效果优于CB。与CB相比,ESPB降低了术后疼痛强度评分和镇痛需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信