{"title":"Retrolaminar versus erector spinae plane block for enhanced recovery after cesarean section: a retrospective study.","authors":"Serpil Bayındır, Cengiz Şanlı","doi":"10.1186/s13741-026-00657-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND: The global rise in cesarean section (CS) rates has made effective, opioid-sparing postoperative analgesia a clinical priority. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and retrolaminar block (RLB) are trunk blocks increasingly incorporated into multimodal analgesia protocols; however, comparative evidence between these two techniques following CS remains limited. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center study analyzed adult women undergoing elective CS under spinal anesthesia, without the use of general anesthesia. The primary outcome was total tramadol consumption within 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included time to first rescue analgesia, VAS scores at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h, 24-h ObsQoR-11 T score, time to discharge, and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS: Of 126 screened patients, 122 were analyzed (ESPB n = 64; RLB n = 58). ESPB significantly reduced 24-h tramadol consumption compared with RLB (130.94 mg vs. 141.9 mg; p = 0.001) and prolonged the time to first rescue analgesia (7.86 ± 1.50 vs. 6.78 ± 1.28 h; p = 0.001). VAS scores were significantly lower in the ESPB group at 6 h (p = 0.005) and 12 h (p < 0.001), with no differences at 1 or 24 h. ObsQoR-11 T scores and discharge times were comparable between groups. Adverse events were infrequent; hypotension occurred in 10.9% of ESPB patients and 5.2% of RLB patients (p = 0.246). CONCLUSIONS: In elective CS, ESPB provided superior early postoperative analgesia and reduced opioid consumption compared to RLB. ESPB appears to be a rational choice when prolonged analgesia and opioid sparing are prioritized in the early postoperative period, whereas RLB may serve as a reliable alternative in settings emphasizing technical simplicity and hemodynamic stability. </p>","PeriodicalId":19764,"journal":{"name":"Perioperative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12964910/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perioperative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13741-026-00657-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The global rise in cesarean section (CS) rates has made effective, opioid-sparing postoperative analgesia a clinical priority. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and retrolaminar block (RLB) are trunk blocks increasingly incorporated into multimodal analgesia protocols; however, comparative evidence between these two techniques following CS remains limited. METHODS: This retrospective, single-center study analyzed adult women undergoing elective CS under spinal anesthesia, without the use of general anesthesia. The primary outcome was total tramadol consumption within 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included time to first rescue analgesia, VAS scores at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h, 24-h ObsQoR-11 T score, time to discharge, and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS: Of 126 screened patients, 122 were analyzed (ESPB n = 64; RLB n = 58). ESPB significantly reduced 24-h tramadol consumption compared with RLB (130.94 mg vs. 141.9 mg; p = 0.001) and prolonged the time to first rescue analgesia (7.86 ± 1.50 vs. 6.78 ± 1.28 h; p = 0.001). VAS scores were significantly lower in the ESPB group at 6 h (p = 0.005) and 12 h (p < 0.001), with no differences at 1 or 24 h. ObsQoR-11 T scores and discharge times were comparable between groups. Adverse events were infrequent; hypotension occurred in 10.9% of ESPB patients and 5.2% of RLB patients (p = 0.246). CONCLUSIONS: In elective CS, ESPB provided superior early postoperative analgesia and reduced opioid consumption compared to RLB. ESPB appears to be a rational choice when prolonged analgesia and opioid sparing are prioritized in the early postoperative period, whereas RLB may serve as a reliable alternative in settings emphasizing technical simplicity and hemodynamic stability.
背景:全球剖宫产率的上升使得有效的、不使用阿片类药物的术后镇痛成为临床优先考虑的问题。竖脊肌平面阻滞(ESPB)和椎板后阻滞(RLB)是越来越多地纳入多模式镇痛方案的主干阻滞;然而,CS后这两种技术之间的比较证据仍然有限。方法:这项回顾性的单中心研究分析了在脊髓麻醉下接受选择性CS的成年女性,没有使用全身麻醉。主要观察指标为术后24小时曲马多总消耗量。次要结局包括首次镇痛时间、1、6、12和24小时VAS评分、24小时ObsQoR-11 T评分、出院时间和不良事件发生率。结果:126例筛查患者中,122例进行了分析(ESPB n = 64; RLB n = 58)。与RLB相比,ESPB显著减少了24小时曲马多消耗(130.94 mg vs 141.9 mg, p = 0.001),延长了首次抢救镇痛时间(7.86±1.50 h vs 6.78±1.28 h, p = 0.001)。ESPB组VAS评分在6 h (p = 0.005)和12 h (p = 0.005)显著降低