Comparative efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion block versus scalp block for hemodynamic stability during craniotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Maintaining hemodynamic stability during craniotomy is essential to prevent elevated intracranial pressure and related complications. Regional blocks, including sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) block and scalp block, may stabilize hemodynamics, but comparative evidence is limited. This study systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of SPG block versus scalp block in adults undergoing craniotomy. This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, and EBSCO (2010–2025). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SPG block with scalp block in adult craniotomy patients. Primary outcomes were intraoperative MAP and HR. Secondary outcomes included intracranial pressure (ICP), postoperative pain, opioid use, and complications. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. Five RCTs (n = 285) were included. No significant differences in MAP or HR were observed in the SPG block group compared with the control group at all measured time points, including post–pin insertion, post–skin incision, and post–dural incision. (peak MAP = -0.01 [-0.12–0.09]; cumulative MAP = 0.00 [-0.14–0.13]; peak HR = -0.05 [-0.16–0.06]; cumulative HR = -0.09 [-0.19–0.02]). Secondary outcomes suggested SPG block may lower ICP, improve brain relaxation, and reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirement with minimal complications. Both SPG block and scalp block maintained intraoperative hemodynamic stability. However, SPG block demonstrated additional advantages, including improved postoperative analgesia, lower intracranial pressure, and enhanced brain relaxation, while remaining a simple and noninvasive technique with minimal adverse effects. Evidence is limited by small sample sizes, highlighting the need for larger, standardized trials to confirm these findings. PROSPERO ID: CRD420251131959.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Anesthesiology
Published
2025-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-025-03523-y
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.19
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion block versus scalp block for hemodynamic stability during craniotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Bhirowo Yudo Pratomo, Girija P. Rath, Sudadi Sudadi, Fiandila Elvana Deviatika et al.
1 citations
BMC Anesthesiology
Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
2.19
article

Comparative efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion block versus scalp block for hemodynamic stability during craniotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Bhirowo Yudo Pratomo, Girija P. Rath, Sudadi Sudadi, Fiandila Elvana Deviatika, Febrian Naufaldi, Muhammad Yogi Pradani
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Maintaining hemodynamic stability during craniotomy is essential to prevent elevated intracranial pressure and related complications. Regional blocks, including sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) block and scalp block, may stabilize hemodynamics, but comparative evidence is limited. This study systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of SPG block versus scalp block in adults undergoing craniotomy. This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, and EBSCO (2010–2025). Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SPG block with scalp block in adult craniotomy patients. Primary outcomes were intraoperative MAP and HR. Secondary outcomes included intracranial pressure (ICP), postoperative pain, opioid use, and complications. Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analysis. Five RCTs (n = 285) were included. No significant differences in MAP or HR were observed in the SPG block group compared with the control group at all measured time points, including post–pin insertion, post–skin incision, and post–dural incision. (peak MAP = -0.01 [-0.12–0.09]; cumulative MAP = 0.00 [-0.14–0.13]; peak HR = -0.05 [-0.16–0.06]; cumulative HR = -0.09 [-0.19–0.02]). Secondary outcomes suggested SPG block may lower ICP, improve brain relaxation, and reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirement with minimal complications. Both SPG block and scalp block maintained intraoperative hemodynamic stability. However, SPG block demonstrated additional advantages, including improved postoperative analgesia, lower intracranial pressure, and enhanced brain relaxation, while remaining a simple and noninvasive technique with minimal adverse effects. Evidence is limited by small sample sizes, highlighting the need for larger, standardized trials to confirm these findings. PROSPERO ID: CRD420251131959.

BMC AnesthesiologyVol. 26(1)
Universitas Gadjah Mada (ID), Rumah Sakit Umum Pusat Dr. Sardjito (ID), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
2.19
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.