The analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block versus ultrasound-guided caudal epidural block for abdominal surgery in pediatric patients – A patient and assessor-blind, randomized controlled study

Abstract

Background: Literature on the efficacy and safety of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in pediatric patients is limited. Hence, we aimed to compare ESPB versus caudal epidural block (CEB) in children undergoing abdominal surgery. Methods: In this patient and assessor-blind study, fifty-two ASA I-II patients, between 1 to 9 years of age, were randomized into groups of 26 each. ESPB group received unilateral or bilateral ultrasound (USG)-guided ESPB with 0.5 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine per side. CEB group received USG-guided CEB with 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of patients requiring postoperative rescue analgesia. The secondary objectives were to assess postoperative Face, Legs, Activity, Cry and Consolability (FLACC) scale scores, duration of analgesia, and consumption of rescue analgesic drugs. Results: More patients in the ESPB group (88.4%), compared to the CEB group (42.3%), required rescue analgesics (P value <0.001). FLACC scores in the ESPB group, though satisfactory, were inferior, to the CEB group. The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter in the ESPB group by 9.54 h (95% CI: 4.51 to 14.57 h, P value <0.001). The median (IQR) consumption of rescue paracetamol was significantly higher in the ESPB group (20 mg/kg (10,20) compared to the CEB group (0.0 mg/kg (0.0,10) P value <0.001)). No adverse effects were reported. Conclusion: In children undergoing abdominal surgery, both ESPB and CEB were safe and efficacious. CEB provided a longer duration and better quality of analgesia. ESPB may be considered when CEB is contraindicated or difficult.

Keywords

• caudal epidural
• erector spinae plane block
• pediatric
• postoperative pain