Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Paravertebral Block in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Mastectomy With Immediate Reconstruction - a Non-inferiority Trial (ESP)

October 20, 2022 updated by: The Netherlands Cancer Institute

Ultrasound-guided Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Paravertebral Block in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Mastectomy With Immediate Reconstruction - a Non-inferiority Trial. A Single-centre Randomized Controlled Non-inferiority Trial With a Parallel Group Design

The objective of this study is to assess the non-inferiority of analgesic efficacy of ESP vs PVB for patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy followed by immediate reconstruction.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

n breast cancer treatment, surgery plays a central role in combination with chemotherapy, radiation and immunotherapy. Surgery may vary from conservative breast sparing interventions to large radical mastectomies with axillary lymph node dissection that require reconstructive (prosthetic) surgery. In many instances, reconstruction is not performed immediately, but immediate reconstruction is possible and offers many advantages to patients.

The Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital performs a large proportion (77%) of mastectomies with immediate reconstruction in the Netherlands. The combination of mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in one operation offers an extra challenge with regards to pain control. Post-operative pain is often treated with opioids, which has systemic side effects (nausea and vomiting). Opioids also inhibit cell-mediated immunity, which is a principal defense against cancer. Regional anesthetic techniques are often performed to reduce opioid consumption and enhance postoperative recovery. The current standard for regional anesthesia for breast surgery is the paravertebral block (PVB). This technique has the potential for severe complications such as epidural hematoma, hemo- or pneumothorax. The erector spinae plane block (ESP) was first described in 2016 as a novel regional anesthetic technique for acute and chronic thoracic pain. The site of injection is distant from the pleura, major blood vessels, and spinal cord; hence, the ESP block has relatively few contraindications and has therefore been suggested as an alternative to PVB when contra-indications, such as a bleeding diathesis, are present.Multiple studies have shown a decrease in opioid consumption in patients undergoing mastectomy, when ESP was compared to placebo. ESP has also been shown to be non-inferior to PVB for pain relief in patients undergoing thoracotomy. To date, only two studies have compared ESP to PVB for breast surgery, with conflicting results. In this study, we would like to investigate whether ESP can be considered non-inferior to PVB with regards to pain relief and use of opioids.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

100

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

  • Name: Sandra Broens, PhD
  • Phone Number: +31(0)205122506
  • Email: s.broens@nki.nl

Study Locations

    • Noord-Holland
      • Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands, 1066CX
        • Recruiting
        • NKI-AvL
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adult patients (18 years of age or older)
  • ASA I-III
  • Patients scheduled for elective unilateral mastectomy followed by direct reconstruction
  • Ability to give written and oral informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient refusal
  • Non-elective surgery
  • Any contraindication to paravertebral block (including bleeding diathesis, coagulopathy, severe pulmonary disease )
  • Allergy to amide-linked local anesthetics
  • Cardiac conductivity disorders (e:g: 2nd and 3rd AV-block)
  • Severe spinal malformations or history of extensive spine surgery - A history of spinal cord injury
  • Known psychiatric disorder
  • Chronic pain patients or patients already using opioids pre-operatively
  • Infection of the skin at the site of needle puncture area - Inability to give oral and written informed consent

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: paravertebral block
Opiates
Experimental: Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block
PVB

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Mean difference of highest numerical rating score (NRS - a linear 11 point scale for self-reported pain) during admission in the recovery room
Time Frame: 1 day
1 day
Difference in the ratio of the means of cumulative opioid dose (administered during admission in the recovery room)
Time Frame: 1 day
1 day

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Success rate as defined by satisfactory spread of local anaesthetic agents on ultrasound
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month
Ease of procedure (self-reported by anaesthetist on scale of 1-5)
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month
Total opioid dose administered on day 0 and on day 1 (iv, subcutaneous or oral - converted to morphine equivalent dose (MEQ)
Time Frame: 1 day after dose administration
1 day after dose administration
Highest pain score on day 0 and 1
Time Frame: 1 day
1 day
Time to readiness for discharge from the recovery room
Time Frame: 1 day
1 day
Complications of block (such as block failure, epidural hematoma, hemo- or pneumothorax and symptoms of toxicity of local anesthetics)
Time Frame: 1 day
1 day
Patient satisfaction on a scale of 0 (extremely unsatisfied) tot 10 (extremely satisfied)
Time Frame: 1 month
1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

June 1, 2021

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

December 31, 2022

Study Completion (Anticipated)

December 31, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 18, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 20, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

October 21, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 21, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 20, 2022

Last Verified

October 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Mastectomy With Immediate Reconstruction

Clinical Trials on Morphine

Subscribe