Perioperative analgesic efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block in posterior cervical spine surgery-a double blinded, randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND CONTENT: Posterior cervical spine surgery (PCSS) are typically open surgeries and entail significant postoperative pain. Current perioperative pain management in PCSS is reliant on multimodal analgesia. While perioperative epidural anesthetic infusion can be used in lumbar surgeries, this is not an option in the cervical spine. Pre-emptive regional analgesia through erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has shown significant perioperative analgesic benefits in lumbar spine surgeries. There are no such clinical studies in PCSS. PURPOSE: To assess the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided ESPB for perioperative analgesia in PCSS. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled, double-blinded study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Eighty-six patients requiring sub-axial PCSS with or without instrumentation were randomized into two groups, those who underwent ESPB with multimodal analgesia (case) and those with only multimodal analgesia (control). OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic and surgical data (blood loss, duration of surgery, perioperative total opioid consumption, muscle relaxants used) were assessed. Postoperatively, the surgical site pain, alertness scale, satisfaction score, time to mobilization and complications were recorded. METHODS: After anesthesia and prone position, case patients received ultrasound-guided ESPB at the T1 level using 15 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine and 8 mg Dexamethasone bilaterally while the control patients received only standard postoperative multimodal analgesia. RESULTS: There were 43 patients in each group; the two groups were identical in demographic and surgical profile. The intraoperative opioid consumption (119.53±40.35 vs. 308.6±189.78; p<.001) in mcg), muscle relaxant usage (50.00±0.00 mg vs. 59.53±3.75 mg, p<.001), surgical duration (124.77±26.63/ 156.74±37.01 min; p<.01) and intraoperative blood loss (310.47±130.73 ml vs. 429.77±148.50 ml; p<.05) were significantly less in the ESPB group. In the postoperative period, the control group's pain score was significantly higher (p<.001). The Modified Observer Alertness/Sedation Score (MOASS) score and satisfaction scores also showed significant differences between the case and control groups (p<.001). The mean time required to ambulate (sitting/walking) was statistically less in cases (15.81±6.15/20.72±4.02 h) when compared to controls (16.86±6.18/ 23.05±8.88 h; p<.001). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing PCSS, ESPB is a safe and effective technique with better outcomes than standard multimodal analgesia alone, in terms of reduced intraoperative opioid requirements and blood loss, better postoperative analgesia and early mobilization.

Non-Fellowship regional anesthesia training and assessment: an international Delphi study on a consensus curriculum.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: While there are several published recommendations and guidelines for trainees undertaking subspecialty Fellowships in regional anesthesia, a similar document describing a core regional anesthesia curriculum for non-fellowship trainees is less well defined. We aimed to produce an international consensus for the training and teaching of regional anesthesia that is applicable for the majority of worldwide anesthesiologists. METHODS: This anonymous, electronic Delphi study was conducted over two rounds and distributed to current and immediate past (within 5 years) directors of regional anesthesia training worldwide. The steering committee formulated an initial list of items covering nerve block techniques, learning objectives and skills assessment and volume of practice, relevant to a non-fellowship regional anesthesia curriculum. Participants scored these items in order of importance using a 10-point Likert scale, with free-text feedback. Strong consensus items were defined as highest importance (score ≥8) by ≥70% of all participants. RESULTS: 469 participants/586 invitations (80.0% response) scored in round 1, and 402/469 participants (85.7% response) scored in round 2. Participants represented 66 countries. Strong consensus was reached for 8 core peripheral and neuraxial blocks and 17 items describing learning objectives and skills assessment. Volume of practice for peripheral blocks was uniformly 16-20 blocks per anatomical region, while ≥50 neuraxial blocks were considered minimum. CONCLUSIONS: This international consensus study provides specific information for designing a non-fellowship regional anesthesia curriculum. Implementation of a standardized curriculum has benefits for patient care through improving quality of training and quality of nerve blocks.

"On Arrival Block"-Management of Upper Extremity Trauma with Resuscitation in the Operating Room.

"On Arrival Block," wherein a brachial block is given to a severely injured upper extremity as the first step of the management protocol in the main operating room, bypassing the emergency department, has been found to be a "game changer" in trauma care. Immediate pain relief on arrival builds confidence in the system, allows pain-free initial examination, facilitates use of tourniquet if there are major bleeding wounds, and allows us to obtain good radiographs without an overlap of bones, which usually happens when the radiographs are taken within a bandage. Using the "On Arrival Block" system, emergency room assessment and resuscitation is bypassed. The patient is resuscitated only once, instead of twice. This avoids much duplication of effort, wasted time, patient suffering, unnecessary costs, and mistakes generated by miscommunication between 2 resuscitation teams. This can be done only in the place where all the resuscitative equipment and drugs are available. A senior anesthesiologist and surgeon must be available. The only contraindication is the suspicion of a brachial plexus injury, which can cause the local anesthetic to seep in through the open dural sleeve and cause total spinal anesthesia. "On Arrival Block" was set up at Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore, India, during the early 90s by the anesthesiologist Ravindra Bhat and the plastic surgeon Raja Sabapathy out of necessity, who recognized its value and made it the standard of care.