Comparison of the Effects of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block and Intramuscular Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Administration on Intraoperative Analgesia and Patient Satisfaction During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Background/Objectives: To compare ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with an intramuscular nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (IM NSAID) for analgesia during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Methods: In this prospective, randomized, open-label trial, 90 patients scheduled for ESWL were allocated into three equal groups: ultrasound-guided ESPB at the T7 level; 75 mg of IM diclofenac sodium 30–45 min before the procedure; or no analgesic premedication (control). Pain was rated on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) during the procedure, and hemodynamic variables, postprocedural analgesic requirement, and patient satisfaction were also recorded. Results: Mean intraoperative VAS scores differed among the groups (ESPB 2.96 ± 2.76, NSAID 4.47 ± 2.41, control 5.30 ± 2.15; p = 0.002, η2 = 0.14). At the first shock wave and at the 25th minute, VAS scores were lower in the ESPB group than in both other groups; at all remaining time points they were lower than in the control group. Early postprocedural analgesic requirement was highest in the control group (33.3% vs. 6.7% and 10.0%; p = 0.016), as it was at the 8th hour (p = 0.007). Satisfaction was lower in the control group than in the ESPB group (p = 0.018), with no significant difference between the control and NSAID groups after adjustment for multiple comparisons. Hemodynamic variables did not differ among the groups, and no complications were observed. Conclusions: ESPB gave better pain control during ESWL than no analgesia, and outperformed the IM NSAID regimen at the first shock wave and at the 25th minute. It also lowered the early analgesic requirement and improved satisfaction, which makes it a practical analgesic option for ESWL.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Sciences
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci14070710
Primary Topic
Anesthesia and Pain Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of the Effects of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block and Intramuscular Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Administration on Intraoperative Analgesia and Patient Satisfaction During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Başak Pehlivan, Abdullah Şengül, Erdoğan Duran, Veli Fahri Pehlivan et al.
Medical Sciences
Anesthesia and Pain Management
article

Comparison of the Effects of Ultrasound-Guided Erector Spinae Plane Block and Intramuscular Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Administration on Intraoperative Analgesia and Patient Satisfaction During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Başak Pehlivan, Abdullah Şengül, Erdoğan Duran, Veli Fahri Pehlivan, Çelebi Karaduman, Ramazan Aslanparçası, Recep Çiçek
article en

Abstract

Background/Objectives: To compare ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with an intramuscular nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (IM NSAID) for analgesia during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Methods: In this prospective, randomized, open-label trial, 90 patients scheduled for ESWL were allocated into three equal groups: ultrasound-guided ESPB at the T7 level; 75 mg of IM diclofenac sodium 30–45 min before the procedure; or no analgesic premedication (control). Pain was rated on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) during the procedure, and hemodynamic variables, postprocedural analgesic requirement, and patient satisfaction were also recorded. Results: Mean intraoperative VAS scores differed among the groups (ESPB 2.96 ± 2.76, NSAID 4.47 ± 2.41, control 5.30 ± 2.15; p = 0.002, η2 = 0.14). At the first shock wave and at the 25th minute, VAS scores were lower in the ESPB group than in both other groups; at all remaining time points they were lower than in the control group. Early postprocedural analgesic requirement was highest in the control group (33.3% vs. 6.7% and 10.0%; p = 0.016), as it was at the 8th hour (p = 0.007). Satisfaction was lower in the control group than in the ESPB group (p = 0.018), with no significant difference between the control and NSAID groups after adjustment for multiple comparisons. Hemodynamic variables did not differ among the groups, and no complications were observed. Conclusions: ESPB gave better pain control during ESWL than no analgesia, and outperformed the IM NSAID regimen at the first shock wave and at the 25th minute. It also lowered the early analgesic requirement and improved satisfaction, which makes it a practical analgesic option for ESWL.

Medical SciencesVol. 14(7)
Mardin Artuklu University (TR), Sivas State Hospital (TR), Şanlıurfa Mehmet Akif İnan Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR), Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi (TR), Türk Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon Derneği (TR), Imation (United States) (US), Harran University (TR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Anesthesia and Pain Management
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.

Laika access coming soon