A randomized trial to compare the analgesic effect of pecto-intercostal fascial plane block with erector spinae plane block after mid-sternotomy incision for cardiac surgery

IntroductionMost cardiac surgeries are performed through a median sternotomy, of which 49% of these patients experience severe pain at rest postoperatively and up to 78% on coughing and deep breathing. Regional thoracic wall blocks targeting thoracic nerve roots improve the analgesia quality and limit opioid use. Truncal blocks through the posterior approach can often be cumbersome in patients with multiple lines and catheters. Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block (PIFB) can be a convenient alternative for achieving comparable analgesia.Material and methodsThe patients were randomly assigned to receive either an ultrasound-guided Pecto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block (PIFB) or Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB). The outcomes measured and compared postoperative pain scores at rest and on deep breathing at 2, 6, 12, 24 h, total opioid (fentanyl) consumption in the postoperative period, time to rescue analgesia and total rescue analgesic doses required, between the two groups.ResultsData from 30 patients were analysed. Post-operative pain scores at rest and during deep breathing were found to be comparable in both groups. The total opioid consumed, time to rescue analgesia and total doses of rescue analgesia was not found to be statistically different in the two groups.ConclusionsPIFB was found to be comparable to ESPB in alleviating post-operative pain in patients who underwent cardiac surgeries through sternotomy. And it/PIFB can be a quicker alternative to posterior truncal blocks since it can be safely given in a supine position with an ultrasound.