Articles Open access

Effectiveness of the erector spinae plane block for the management of persistent pain after lumbar surgery: a prospective study

Authors

Published
22 January 2025
Section
Articles
DOI
10.4081/ahr.2025.21

Abstract

This prospective study evaluated the effectiveness of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in managing persistent or recurrent pain following lumbar spine surgery. We analyzed data from 42 patients who received ESPB, assessing their perceived improvement, analgesic consumption, quality of life, and potential predictors of treatment response. Patients reported significant improvement one- and three-months post-treatment, although the level of improvement decreased between these time points. ESPB effectively reduced nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and antiepileptic medication use during the first month. A positive correlation emerged between the frequency of healthcare visits and perceived improvement. Patients with radiculopathy experienced less improvement at three months. This study underscores the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to managing persistent postoperative pain, including close follow-up and individualized treatment strategies. The findings support the use of ESPB within a comprehensive pain management plan for patients experiencing chronic pain after lumbar spine surgery. However, further research is needed to determine the duration of analgesia and effectiveness in specific patient subgroups.

Keywords

Data Availability Statement

the datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request

References

  1. 1. Stevans JM, Delitto A, Khoja SS, et al. Risk factors associated with transition from acute to chronic low back pain in US patients seeking primary care. JAMA Netw Open 2021;4:e2037371. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37371
  2. 2. Salas-Fraire O, Rivera-Pérez JA, Guevara-Neri NP, et al. Efficacy of whole-body cryotherapy in the treatment of chronic low back pain: Quasi-experimental study. J Orthop Sci 2023;28:112-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2021.10.006
  3. 3. Shiri R, Falah-Hassani K. Does leisure time physical activity protect against low back pain? Systematic review and meta-analysis of 36 prospective cohort studies. Br J Sports Med 2017;51:1410-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-097352
  4. 4. Becker A, Held H, Redaelli M, et al. Low back pain in primary care: Costs of care and prediction of future health care utilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1714-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cd656f
  5. 5. Amirdelfan K, Webster L, Poree L, Sukul V, McRoberts P. Treatment options for failed back surgery syndrome patients with refractory chronic pain: an evidence based approach. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017;42:S41-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002217
  6. 6. Sebaaly A, Lahoud MJ, Rizkallah M, et al. Etiology, evaluation, and treatment of failed back surgery syndrome. Asian Spine J 2018;12:574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2018.12.3.574
  7. 7. Christelis N, Simpson B, Russo M, et al. Persistent spinal pain syndrome: a proposal for failed back surgery syndrome and ICD-11. Pain Med 2021;22:807-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnab015
  8. 8. Daniell JR, Osti OL. Failed back surgery syndrome: a review article. Asian Spine J. 2018;12:372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2018.12.2.372
  9. 9. Kesilmez EC, Yuksel Z. The place of epiduroscopy in the management of low back pain after lumbar surgery. Med Sci 2023;27:e199ms3015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54905/disssi/v27i134/e199ms3015
  10. 10. De Cassai A, Geraldini F, Freo U, et al. Erector spinae plane block and chronic pain: An updated review and possible future directions. Biology (Basel) 2012;12:1073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12081073

Metrics

Citations and online attention from Dimensions, Altmetric and PlumX.

PlumX Metrics

License

Copyright (c) 2025 the Author(s)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.