Erector spinae plane versus paravertebral nerve blocks for postoperative analgesia after breast surgery: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Paravertebral nerve blocks (PVBs) are frequently used to treat pain during and following breast surgery, but have various undesirable risks such as pneumothorax. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) also provides perioperative breast analgesia, but is purported to be easier to administer with a favorable safety profile. However, it remains unknown if the new ESPB provides comparable analgesia as the decades-old PVB technique. METHODS: Subjects undergoing unilateral or bilateral non-mastectomy breast surgery were randomized to a single-injection ESPB or PVB in a subject-blinded fashion (ropivacaine 0.5% with epinephrine; 20 mL unilateral or 16 mL/side for bilateral). We hypothesized that (1) analgesia would be non-inferior in the recovery room as measured on a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) with ESPB, and (2) opioid consumption would be non-inferior in the operating and recovery rooms with ESPB. RESULTS: Both pain scores and opioid consumption were higher in subjects with ESPBs (n=50) than PVBs (n=50; median NRS 3.0 vs 0; 95% CI -3.0 to 0; p=0.0011; and median morphine equivalents 2.0 vs 1.5 mg; 95% CI -1.2 to -0.1; p=0.0043). No block-related adverse events occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: PVBs provided superior analgesia and reduced opioid requirements following non-mastectomy breast surgery. To compare the relatively rare complications between the techniques will require a sample size 1-2 orders of magnitude greater than the current investigation; however, without a dramatic improvement in safety profile for ESPBs, it appears that PVBs are superior to ESPBs for postoperative analgesia after non-mastectomy breast surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03549234.

Suture-method versus Through-the-needle Catheters for Continuous Popliteal-sciatic Nerve Blocks: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The basic perineural catheter design has changed minimally since inception, with the catheter introduced through or over a straight needle. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently cleared a novel perineural catheter design comprising a catheter attached to the back of a suture-shaped needle that is inserted, advanced along the arc of its curvature pulling the catheter past the target nerve, and then exited through the skin in a second location. The authors hypothesized that analgesia would be noninferior using the new versus traditional catheter design in the first two days after painful foot/ankle surgery with a primary outcome of average pain measured with the Numeric Rating Scale. METHODS: Subjects undergoing painful foot or ankle surgery with a continuous supraparaneural popliteal-sciatic nerve block 5 cm proximal to the bifurcation were randomized to either a suture-type or through-the-needle catheter and subsequent 3-day 0.2% ropivacaine infusion (basal 6 ml/h, bolus 4 ml, lockout 30 min). Subjects received daily follow-up for the first four days after surgery, including assessment for evidence of malfunction or dislodgement of the catheters. RESULTS: During the first two postoperative days the mean ± SD average pain scores were lower in subjects with the suture-catheter (n = 35) compared with the through-the-needle (n = 35) group (2.7 ± 2.4 vs. 3.4 ± 2.4) and found to be statistically noninferior (95% CI, -1.9 to 0.6; P < 0.001). No suture-style catheter was completely dislodged (0%), whereas the tips of three (9%) traditional catheters were found outside of the skin before purposeful removal on postoperative day 3 (P = 0.239). CONCLUSIONS: Suture-type perineural catheters provided noninferior analgesia compared with traditional catheters for continuous popliteal-sciatic blocks after painful foot and ankle surgery. The new catheter design appears to be a viable alternative to traditional designs used for the past seven decades.