+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparison of Analgesic Effect Between Erector Spinae Plane Block and Transversus Abdominis Plane Block After Elective Cesarean Section: A Prospective Randomized Single-Blind Controlled Study

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          This study compared the analgesic efficacy of a bilateral erector spinae plane (ESP) block with that of a bilateral transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block after elective cesarean delivery.


          Sixty mothers scheduled for elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive either ESP block or TAP block. The ESP group received ESP block at the level of the ninth thoracic transverse process with 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery. The TAP group received an ultrasound-guided TAP block with 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine on completion of delivery. The primary outcome was the duration of analgesia achieved by each block. Secondary outcome measures were the postoperative pain severity, total tramadol consumption, patient satisfaction.


          The median (interquartile range) duration of block was longer in the ESP group than in the TAP group (12 hours [10, 14] vs 8 hours [8, 8], p<0.0001). In the first 24 hours, the mean visual analog pain score at rest was lower by 0.32 units in the ESP group. The median tramadol consumption in the first 24 hours was significantly higher in the TAP group than in the ESP group (125 mg [100, 150] vs 100 mg [75, 100, p=0.003]).


          Compared with the TAP block, the ESP block provides more effective pain relief, has a longer duration of analgesic action, prolongs time to first analgesic requirement, is associated with less tramadol consumption, and can be used in multimodal analgesia and opioid-sparing regimens after cesarean section.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block for analgesia after Caesarean delivery.

          The landmark-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is an effective method of providing postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery. We evaluated the analgesic efficacy of the ultrasound (US)-guided TAP block in patients undergoing Caesarean delivery. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed at a tertiary maternity hospital. Fifty women undergoing Caesarean delivery received bilateral US-guided TAP blocks with either ropivacaine 0.5% or saline. All participants received a spinal anaesthetic with bupivacaine and fentanyl, followed by postoperative acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and patient-controlled i.v. morphine without long-acting intrathecal opioids. Each patient was assessed 24 h after delivery for morphine usage, average pain score, nausea, vomiting, pruritus, drowsiness, and satisfaction with pain relief. Forty-seven participants completed the trial, 23 in the active group and 24 in the placebo group. Total morphine use in 24 h was reduced in the active group (median 18.0 mg) compared with the placebo group (median 31.5 mg, P<0.05). The active group reported improved satisfaction with their pain relief measured by visual analogue scale compared with the placebo group (median 96 vs 77 mm, P=0.008). Fewer patients required antiemetics in the active group (P=0.03). There were no local complications attributable to the TAP block, but one participant had an anaphylactoid reaction after ropivacaine injection. The US-guided TAP block reduces morphine requirements after Caesarean delivery when used as a component of a multimodal analgesic regimen. Registered with the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000540314. URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au/trial_view.aspx?ID=83176.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane Block in Adult Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

            Previous meta-analyses of the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block have examined a maximum of 12 articles, including fewer than 650 participants, and have not examined the effect of ultrasound-guided techniques specifically. Recently, many trials that use ultrasound approaches to TAP block have been published, which report conflicting analgesic results. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided TAP blocks exclusively for all types of abdominal surgeries in adult patients.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Duration of analgesic effectiveness after the posterior and lateral transversus abdominis plane block techniques for transverse lower abdominal incisions: a meta-analysis.

              Both posterior and lateral transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block techniques provide effective early (0-12 h) postoperative analgesia after transverse incision surgery. However, whether either technique produces prolonged analgesia lasting beyond 12 h remains controversial. This meta-analysis examines the duration of analgesia associated with posterior and lateral TAP blocks in the first 48 h after lower abdominal transverse incision surgery. We retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the analgesic effects of TAP block compared with control in patients undergoing lower abdominal transverse incision surgery. Outcomes sought included interval postoperative i.v. morphine consumption and also rest and dynamic pain scores at 12, 24, 36, and 48 h postoperatively. Opioid-related side-effects and patient satisfaction at 24 and 48 h were also assessed. The 12-24 h interval morphine consumption was designated as a primary outcome. Twelve RCTs including 641 patients were analysed. Four trials examined the posterior technique and eight assessed the lateral technique. Compared with control, the posterior TAP block reduced postoperative morphine consumption during the 12-24 h and 24-48 h intervals by 9.1 mg (95% CI: -16.83, -1.45; P=0.02) and 5 mg (95% CI: -9.54, -0.52; P=0.03), respectively. It also reduced rest pain scores at 24, 36, and 48 h, and also dynamic pain scores at 12, 24, 36, and 48 h. Differences were not significant with the lateral TAP block. Based on the comparisons with control, the posterior TAP block appears to produce more prolonged analgesia than the lateral TAP block. Future RCTs comparing these two techniques are required to confirm our findings.

                Author and article information

                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                19 May 2020
                : 13
                : 1073-1080
                [1 ]Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Fayoum University , Cairo, Egypt
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Mohamed Ahmed Hamed Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Fayoum University , Fayoum63511, EgyptTel +2011 18 560 065 Email mah07@fayoum.edu.eg
                © 2020 Boules et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 4, References: 26, Pages: 8
                The authors have no sources of funding to declare for this manuscript.
                Original Research


                Comment on this article