To compare the efficacy of the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) and conventional analgesia (CA) in pain management after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
After obtaining the approval of the Institutional Ethics Committee and patients' written informed consent, 60 cases aged 18 to 65 years with the status of American Society of Anesthesia I / II and body mass index of 18. 5-30 were included in the study. The patients were randomized to receive ESPB or CA by a computer-based list.
The demographic parameters were similar in both groups. Regarding the visual analog scale (VAS) score assessment, the patients in the ESPB group described statistically less pain according to the total score and evaluations at hours 0, 1, 6 and 24 (P = 0.001, 0.009, <0.001, and 0.014 respectively). The time to first rescue analgesic was longer in the ESPB group compared to the CA group (172.33±180.5 min vs 84.33±71.12 min), which was statistically significant (P = 0.016). The use of tramadol and paracetamol was less in the ESPB group (60±72.3 mg vs 120 ± 55 mg and 1.8±0.76 gr vs 3.2±0.99 gr, respectively). (P =0.001 and < 0.001, respectively) Conclusions: Erector spinae plane block is a safe technique that provides effective postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing PCNL. Erector spinae plane block decreases the postoperative VAS score, prolongs the salvage analgesia time, and reduces the need for paracetamol and tramadol use compared to general anesthesia with CA.
Journal of endourology. 2019 Dec 27 [Epub ahead of print]
Mehmet Hamza Gultekin, Abdullah Erdogan, Fethi Akyol
Erzincan Binali Yildirim University Mengucek Gazi Education and Training Hospital, Department of Urology, Erzincan, Turkey; ., Erzincan Binali Yildirim University, Mengucek Gazi Education and Training Hospital, Deartment of Urology, Erzincan, Turkey; ., Erzincan Binali Yildirim University, Mengucek Gazi Education and Training Hospital, Department of Anesthesiology, Erzincan, Turkey; .
This webpage is supported through an unrestricted educational grant from Bayer. Bayer is not involved in content development and the views expressed represent those of the patient and physician contributors.

