PVI vs ESP Block for Reducing Bleeding and Postoperative Pain in Lumbar Fusion Surgery.

Overview

This randomized controlled trial compares periarticular vasoconstrictor infiltration (PVI) versus erector spinae plane block (ESP) to reduce bleeding and postoperative pain in adults undergoing lumbar fusion surgery (up to 3 levels). Patients are randomly assigned 1:1 to receive ultrasound-guided ropivacaine 0.2% + epinephrine 1:200,000: PVI (150-200mL bilateral in retrolaminar, thoracolumbar fascia, supraspinous ligament, subcutaneous planes) or ESP (20mL/side at transverse processes). Both groups receive standardized general anesthesia (TIVA), multimodal analgesia (dexamethasone, paracetamol, dexketoprofen/metamizole, ketamine, magnesium), and tranexamic acid. Multicenter study: Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (Barcelona, 32 patients) and Hospital Quirón Salud Murcia (30 patients). Primary outcome: intraoperative blood loss (surgical aspirate minus irrigation + gravimetric gauze weight). Secondary outcomes: Fromme surgical field scale, pain (NRS at REA discharge/24h/48h), opioid consumption (morphine equivalents), PONV/antiemetic use, drain output, hospital stay, patient satisfaction. N=62 patients (31/arm). Blinded outcome assessment.

Lumbar fusion surgery treats degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis, and lumbar stenosis but carries high intraoperative bleeding risk (500-2000mL loss, 30% transfusion rate) and severe postoperative pain requiring systemic opioids. Periarticular vasoconstrictor infiltration (PVI), based on tumescent/WALANT principles, shows promise for hemostasis and analgesia by creating chemical tourniquet via epinephrine while blocking dorsal rami. Erector spinae plane (ESP) block is current standard but uses lower volumes (20mL/side) and different anatomic target. No prior RCTs compare PVI vs ESP head-to-head in lumbar fusion.