Search

Abstract Background The efficacy of the erector spinae plane (ESP) block in mitigating postoperative pain has been shown for a range of thoracic and abdominal procedures. However, there is a paucity of literature investigating its impact on postoperative analgesia as well as its influence on weaning and subsequent recovery in comparison to thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) in median sternotomy-based approach for open-cardiac surgeries and hence the study. Methods Irrespective of gender or age, 74 adult patients scheduled to undergo open cardiac surgery were enrolled and randomly allocated into two groups: the Group TEA (thoracic epidural block) and the Group ESP (bilateral Erector Spinae Plane block). The following variables were analysed prospectively and compared among the groups with regard to pain control, as determined by the VAS Scale both at rest (VASR) and during spirometry (VASS), time to extubation, quantity and frequency of rescue analgesia delivered, day of first ambulation, length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and any adverse cardiac events (ACE), respiratory events (ARE), or other events, if pertinent. Results Clinical and demographic variables were similar in both groups. Both groups had overall good pain control, as determined by the VAS scale both at rest (VASR) and with spirometry (VASS) with Group ESP demonstrating superior pain regulation compared to Group TEA during the post-extubation period at 6, 9, and 12 h, respectively (P > 0.05). Although statistically insignificant, the postoperative mean rescue analgesic doses utilised in both groups were comparable, but there was a higher frequency requirement in Group TEA. The hemodynamic and respiratory profiles were comparable, except for a few arrhythmias in Group TEA. With comparable results, early recovery, fast-track extubation, and intensive care unit (ICU) stay were achieved. Conclusions The ESP block has been found to have optimal analgesic effects during open cardiac surgery, resulting in a decreased need for additional analgesic doses and eliminating the possibility of a coagulation emergency. Consequently, it presents itself as a safer alternative to the potentially invasive thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA).