BACKGROUND: Data on the effectiveness of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) for patients undergoing liver surgeries is limited and inconclusive. We hereby aimed to systematically review if ESPB can provide adequate analgesia after liver surgery.
METHODS: PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, and gray literature were examined up to 25th April 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ESPB with control or spinal analgesia.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs were included of which three compared ESPB with spinal analgesia. 24-hour opioid consumption did not differ significantly between ESPB vs. control (MD: -35.25 95% CI: -77.01, 6.52 I2 = 99%) or ESPB vs. spinal analgesia (MD: 2.32 95% CI: -6.12, 10.77 I2 = 91%). Comparing pain scores between ESPB and control, a small but significant effect favoring ESPB was noted at 12 h and 48 h, but not at 6-8 h and 24 h. Pain scores did not differ between ESPB and spinal analgesia. The risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting was also not significantly different between ESPB vs. control or spinal analgesia. GRADE assessment shows moderate certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: ESPB may not provide any significant postoperative analgesia in liver surgery patients. There was a tendency of reduced opioid consumption with ESPB. Limited data also showed that ESPB and spinal analgesia had no difference in pain scores and 24-hour analgesic consumption.

UNASSIGNED: With the advancements in regional anesthesia and ultrasound techniques, the use of non-neuraxial blocks like the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has been increasing in cardiac surgeries with promising outcomes. A total of 3,264 articles were identified through a literature search. Intervention was defined as ESPB. Comparators were no regional technique performed or sham blocks. Four studies with a total of 226 patients were included. Postoperative opioid consumption was lower in the group that received ESPB than the group that did not (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -204.08; 95% CI: -239.98 to -168.19; P < 0.00001). Intraoperative opioid consumption did not differ between the two groups (WMD: -398.14; 95% CI: -812.17 to 15.98; P = 0.06). Pain scores at 0 hours were lower in the group that received ESPB than the group that did not (WMD: -1.27; 95% CI: -1.99 to -0.56; P = 0.0005). Pain scores did not differ between the two groups at 4-6 hours (WMD: -0.79; 95% CI: -1.70 to 0.13; P = 0.09) and 12 hours (WMD: -0.83; 95% CI: -1.82 to 0.16; P = 0.10). Duration of mechanical ventilation in minutes was lower in the group that received ESPB than the group that did not (WMD: -45.12; 95% CI: -68.82 to -21.43; P = 0.0002). Given the limited number of studies and the substantial heterogeneity of measured outcomes and interventions, further studies are required to assess the benefit of ESPB in midline sternotomies.

暂无摘要。

Degenerative changes of the lumbar intervertebral disc are the most significant causes of enduring lower back pain. The possibility of the diagnosis is limited in people with this low back pain. Therefore, it is essential to identify the relevant back pain subgroups. The paraspinal muscles, that is, the muscles that attach to the spine, are necessary for the proper functioning of the spine and the body; insufficiency can result in back pain. Lower back pain disorders are strongly associated with altered function or structure of these paraspinal muscles, especially fibrosis and fatty infiltration. Modic changes are the bone marrow changes of the end plate in the vertebral body seen on MRI. These are strongly related to degeneration of the disc and are common in individuals with back pain symptoms. Articles were selected from Google Scholar using the terms \'Modic changes,\' \'end plate changes,\' \'paraspinal muscles,\' and \'lower back pain. \' This article compiled different studies aiming to enhance the comprehension of biochemical processes resulting in the development of lumbar pain. Search using the keywords \'Modic changes,\'\' end plate changes lower back pain,\' \'paraspinal muscles lower back pain,\' and \'Modic changes lower back pain\' on Google Scholar yielded 33000, 41000, 49400, and 17,800 results, and 958, 118, 890 and 560 results on Pubmed respectively.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia is now widely practised to minimise postoperative opioid consumption while optimising pain control. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the analgesic efficacy of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominal surgeries. This will be determined by perioperative opioid consumption, subjective pain scores, and incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting.
METHODS: The authors systemically searched electronic databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published up to February 2023 comparing ESPB with other adjuvant analgesic techniques in laparoscopic abdominal surgeries. Nine randomised controlled trials encompassing 666 subjects were included in our study.
RESULTS: ESPB was shown to reduce postoperative opioid consumption [mean difference (MD) of -5.95 mg (95% CI: -8.86 to -3.04; P <0.0001); I2 =89%], intraoperative opioid consumption MD of -102.4 mcg (95% CI: -145.58 to -59.21; P <0.00001); I2 =39%, and incidence of nausea [RR 0.38 (95% CI: 0.25-0.60; P <0.0001); I2 =0%] and vomiting [RR 0.32 (95% CI: 0.17-0.63; P =0.0009); I2 =0%] in laparoscopic abdominal surgeries. Subgroup analysis on laparoscopic colorectal surgeries further showed reduction in postoperative pain scores MD of -0.68 (95% CI: -0.94 to -0.41); P <0.00001; I2 =0%].
CONCLUSIONS: This study concludes that ESPB is a valuable technique with proven efficacy to potentially promote faster postoperative recovery through optimising pain control while minimising opioid requirements.

暂无摘要。

Spinal surgeries are accompanied by excessive pain due to extensive dissection and muscle retraction during the procedure. Thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) blocks for spinal surgeries are a recent addition to regional anesthesia to improve postoperative pain management. When performing a classical TLIP (cTLIP) block, anesthetics are injected between the muscle (m.) multifidus and m. longissimus. During a modified TLIP (mTLIP) block, anesthetics are injected between the m. longissimus and m. iliocostalis instead. Our systematic review provides a comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of TLIP blocks in improving postoperative outcomes in spinal surgery through an analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).We conducted a systematic review based on the PRISMA guidelines using PubMed and Scopus databases. Inclusion criteria required studies to be RCTs in English that used TLIP blocks during spinal surgery and report both outcome measures. Outcome data includes postoperative opioid consumption and pain.A total of 17 RCTs were included. The use of a TLIP block significantly decreases postoperative opioid use and pain compared to using general anesthesia (GA) plus 0.9% saline with no increase in complications. There were mixed outcomes when compared against wound infiltration with local anesthesia. When compared with erector spinae plane blocks (ESPB), TLIP blocks often decreased analgesic use, however, this did not always translate to decreased pain. The cTLIP and mTLP block methods had comparable postoperative outcomes but the mTLIP block had a significantly higher percentage of one-time block success.The accumulation of the current literature demonstrates that TLIP blocks are superior to non-block procedures in terms of analgesia requirements and reported pain throughout the hospitalization in patients who underwent spinal surgery. The various levels of success seen with wound infiltration and ESPB could be due to the nature of the different spinal procedures. For example, studies that saw superiority with TLIP blocks included fusion surgeries which is a more invasive procedure resulting in increased postoperative pain compared to discectomies.The results of our systematic review include moderate-quality evidence that show TLIP blocks provide effective pain control after spinal surgery. Although, the application of mTLIP blocks is more successful, more studies are needed to confirm that superiority of mTLIP over cTLIP blocks. Additionally, further high-quality research is needed to verify the potential benefit of TLIP blocks as a common practice for spinal surgeries.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block and erector spinae plane block are widely used for postoperative analgesia in adult patients undergoing abdominal surgeries. This protocol aims to compare the analgesic effects between ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block and erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain in abdominal surgeries.
METHODS: Four databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), will be searched. Randomised controlled trials that compared the analgesic effects between ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block and erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain in adult patients will be identified. The primary outcomes are time to the first analgesic request and postoperative analgesic consumption over 24 hours. Secondary outcomes will include postoperative pain scores and the incidence of side effects. RevMan V.5.3 software will be used for data processing and statistical analysis. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to assess the evidence quality of outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Ethical approval is not required for this study. Results of this present study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42023445802.

Low back pain (LBP) is the most common injury in golfers of all abilities. The primary aim of this review was to improve understanding of human golf swing biomechanics associated with LBP. A systematic review using the PRISMA guidelines was performed. Nine studies satisfying inclusion criteria and dually reporting golf swing biomechanics and LBP were identified. Human golf swing biomechanics potentially associated with LBP include: reduced lumbar flexion velocity; reduced transition phase length; reduced lumbar torsional load; earlier onset of erector spinae contraction; increased lumbar lateral flexion velocity; reduced or greater erector spinae activity; and earlier onset of external oblique contraction. These potential associations were undermined by a very limited and conflicting quality of evidence, study designs which introduced a severe potential for bias and a lack of prospective study design. There is no conclusive evidence to support the commonly held belief that LBP is associated with \"poor\" golf swing technique. The potential associations identified should be further investigated by prospective studies of robust design, recruiting participants of both sexes and dexterities. Once firm associations have been identified, further research is required to establish how this knowledge can be best integrated into injury prevention and rehabilitation.
LBP has the highest incidence of any injury in elite, sub-elite and recreational golfers, causing a significant burden of injury worldwide.There is very limited and conflicting evidence that some human biomechanical factors in the golf swing may be associated with LBP.Prospective studies investigating the full movement pattern are required in order to improve understanding of the potential relationship between the biomechanics of the golf swing and LBP.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common musculoskeletal conditions. People with LBP often display changes of neuromuscular control and trunk mechanical properties, including trunk stiffness. Although a few individual studies have examined back muscle stiffness in individuals with LBP, a synthesis of the evidence appears to be lacking. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to synthesize and evaluate the available literature investigating back muscle stiffness in association with LBP.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and ScienceDirect for studies, that compared back muscle stiffness, measured either by ultrasound-based elastography or myotonometry, between individuals with and without LBP. Pooled data of the included studies were presented descriptively. Additionally, we performed two meta-analyses to calculate the standardized mean difference between the two groups for resting stiffness of the multifidus and erector spinae muscle. For both meta-analyses, the random effect model was used and the weight of individual studies was calculated using the inverse-variance method. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional studies. Furthermore, the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included in our systematic review. Our results suggest that individuals with LBP have higher stiffness of the multifidus (SMD = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.15 - 0.81, p < 0.01; I2 = 48 %, p = 0.11) and erector spinae at rest (SMD = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.11 - 0.62, p < 0.01; I2 = 39 %, p = 0.14) compared to asymptomatic controls. On the other hand, the evidence regarding muscle stiffness during submaximal contractions is somewhat contradictory.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this systematic review we conclude that people with LBP may have higher back muscle stiffness compared to asymptomatic controls. Addressing muscle stiffness might represent an important goal of LBP treatment. Nevertheless, our findings should be interpreted with extreme caution due to a limited quality of evidence, small number of included studies and differences in measurement methodology.