ITPB 1 vs 3 in VATS

April 9, 2025 updated by: Prof Manoj K Karmakar, Chinese University of Hong Kong

Quality of Recovery After Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Prospective, Randomised, Double-Blinded Trial Comparing Single and Three Level Intertransverse Process Block.

This study aims to evaluate the quality of recovery after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) by comparing the efficacy of a single-level intertransverse process block (ITPB) against a three-level ITPB, with particular attention to the quality of recovery measured by the QoR15 score at 24 hours post-surgery.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeries (VATS) are currently the preferred technique for treating carcinoma lung. Despite being minimally invasive, VATS is associated with significant acute and chronic postoperative pain. Regional anesthetic techniques have the potential to block afferent nociception at the peripheral nerve level, the dorsal root ganglion (DRG), the thoracic sympathetic ganglion, or through a combination of these mechanisms. While the peripheral nerve block techniques such as the intercostal nerve block and serratus anterior plane block can provide analgesia for port related somatic pain, the visceral pain mediated via the thoracic sympathetic chain during VATS procedure are amenable only to epidural or paravertebral regional anaesthetic techniques. The thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) provides ipsilateral, segmental, somatic, and sympathetic nerve blockade across multiple contiguous thoracic dermatomes and is currently the first choice for VATS. During a TPVB, the local anaesthetic (LA) is injected into the paravertebral space adjacent to the thoracic vertebra, near the intervertebral foramen.

Traditionally, TPVB is performed using either landmark or ultrasound guidance, with the LA deposited anterior to the superior costotransverse ligament (SCTL). This typically involves the block needle piercing the SCTL to reach the wedge-shaped TPVB space. While Thoracic Paravertebral Block (TPVB) is generally regarded as safe, the proximity of the needle tip to the pleura during injection poses a heightened risk of pleural puncture and pneumothorax, especially when administered by less experienced physicians. Consequently, the Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) is gaining popularity as an alternative. However, it is important to note that ESPB also has its own limitations.

Recent advancements have redefined thoracic paravertebral anatomy, identifying a fat-filled retro-SCTL space located behind the SCTL. This space is farther from the pleura but remains in close proximity to anterior neural targets such as the thoracic spinal nerve, the DRG and thoracic sympathetic ganglion. It is hypothesised that an LA injection into the retro-SCTL space-referred to as the Intertransverse Process Block (ITPB) at the medial retro SCTL space-could produce a rapid onset of ipsilateral and/or bilateral segmental somatic and sympathetic nerve blockade of the thoracic dermatomes without the need to pierce the SCTL, thereby reducing the risk of pleural puncture and pneumothorax. Preliminary investigations on the ITPB for VATS is promising, however, there is a paucity of data on the effect of the number of injections following an ultrasound-guided (USG) ITPB on the analgesic efficacy, which this study aims to evaluate.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

80

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

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

      • New Territories, Hong Kong
        • Recruiting
        • Department of Anaesthesia, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin
        • 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

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • ASA I-III patients
  • 18 to 80 years of age
  • Patients with primary carcinoma lung scheduled for resection under VATS procedure

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patient refusal
  • Local skin infection at the area of injection
  • Coagulopathy
  • History of allergy to local anaesthetics

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: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Single Level Intertransverse Process Block
Patients with primary carcinoma lung scheduled for resection under VATS procedure and randomized in SL group will receive a single level ITPB at retro SCTL space injection and it will be performed at T5 vertebral level after which two subsequent IM sham injections with 2-3 ml 0.9% saline will be performed at T3 and T7 level.

Patients will then be positioned in the lateral decubitus position with the side to be blocked facing upwards, the neck slightly flexed and the upper arm resting on the pillow for the USG ITPB.

The thoracic intervertebral levels (T3, T5, T7) will be identified and marked on the patient. Ultrasound gel will be applied to the skin foracoustic coupling and the transducer is placed 2-3 cm lateral to the spinous process, at the target vertebral level, in the t After obtaining the target transverse ultrasound window at the articular process level, under strict aseptic precautions and local infiltration (Lignocaine 1%), a SonoTap nerve block needle (Pajunk, 22G, 80 mm, Pajunk, Geisingen, Germany) will be inserted in-plane and slowly advanced from a lateral to medial direction until its tip is located at the medial aspect of the retro-SCTL space. After negative heme aspiration, 25 ml of LA mixture containing 0.5% ropivacaine with 1: 200,000 adrenaline will be injected slowly in small aliquots.

Active Comparator: Three Level Intertransverse Process Block
Patients with primary carcinoma lung scheduled for resection under VATS procedure and randomized in TL group will receive injection at T3, T5 and T7.
Patients will then be positioned in the lateral decubitus position with the side to be blocked facing upwards, the neck slightly flexed and the upper arm resting on the pillow for the USG ITPB. After obtaining the target transverse ultrasound window at the inferior articular process level (described above) at the T7 level, under strict aseptic precautions and local infiltration (Lignocaine 1%), a SonoTap nerve block needle (Pajunk, 22G, 80 mm, Pajunk, Geisingen, Germany) will be inserted in-plane and slowly advanced from a lateral to medial direction until its tip is located at the medial aspect of the retro-SCTL space. After negative heme aspiration, 8 ml of LA mixture containing 0.5% ropivacaine with 1:200,000 adrenaline will be injected slowly in small aliquots. Subsequently, similar injections will be performed at T5 and T3 level with 8 ml and 9 ml LA mixture, respectively (Total LA mixture volume: 25 ml).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Quality of recovery
Time Frame: At 24 hours post surgery
Comparing the quality of recovery 15 (QoR15) score at 24 hours between the study groups. QoR15: a minimum score of 0 (poor recovery) and a maximum score of 150 (excellent recovery)
At 24 hours post surgery

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Area under the curve for pain at rest and movement (deep breathing)
Time Frame: Over the first 24 hours after surgery
Comparing the area under the curve (AUC) of postoperative pain numerical rating score (NRS, 0-10) at rest and deep breathing (pain burden).
Over the first 24 hours after surgery
Number of hypoesthetic and anaesthetic dermatomes
Time Frame: At 15 and 30 minutes after block completion
Number of anaesthetic and hypoesthetic dermatomes on the ventral and dorsal aspect of the thorax
At 15 and 30 minutes after block completion
Rescue fentanyl and phenylephrine administration
Time Frame: Intraoperative
Total rescue fentanyl and phenylephrine administration
Intraoperative
Postoperative morphine, tramadol and ondansetron consumption
Time Frame: At 24 and 48 hour post sugery
Total postoperative morphine, tramadol and ondansetron consumption
At 24 and 48 hour post sugery

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Manoj K Karmakar, MD, FRCA, Chinese University of Hong Kong

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)

March 4, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

March 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

April 30, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 17, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 17, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

February 21, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

April 11, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 9, 2025

Last Verified

April 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2025.547

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

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.

Subscribe