[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"lumbar-spinal-fusion-surgery\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:lumbar-spinal-fusion-surgery":28},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,2,0,[8,50],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":18,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":22,"briefSummary":24,"conditions":25,"keywords":29,"overallStatus":38,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":39,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":40,"startDateStruct":43,"completionDateStruct":45,"leadSponsor":47,"locationsCount":5},"100635240","pvi-vs-esp-block-for-reducing-bleeding-and-postoperative-pain-in-lumbar-fusion-surgery-100635240",false,"NCT07550114","PVI vs ESP Block for Reducing Bleeding and Postoperative Pain in Lumbar Fusion Surgery.","EFFICACY OF PERIARTICULAR VASOCONSTRICTOR INFILTRATION (PVI) VERSUS ERECTOR SPINAE PLANE BLOCK (ESP) IN REDUCING BLEEDING AND POSTOPERATIVE PAIN CONTROL IN LUMBAR FUSION SURGERY: RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* More than 18 years old.\n* ASA I-III\n* Scheduled primary spinal instrumentation surgery (lumbar\u002Fthoracolumbar fusion)\n* Signed informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Allergy\u002Fcontraindication to study drugs (ropivacaine, epinephrine)\n* Coagulopathy.\n* Infection at block site\n* Neuromuscular disease affecting evaluation.\n* Chronic opioid use (\\>30mg morphine equivalents\u002Fday)\n* Cognitive impairment preventing pain reporting.\n* Pregnancy","ALL","18 Years",{"count":19,"type":20},62,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[23],"NA","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\u002Fside at transverse processes). Both groups receive standardized general anesthesia (TIVA), multimodal analgesia (dexamethasone, paracetamol, dexketoprofen\u002Fmetamizole, 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\u002F24h\u002F48h), opioid consumption (morphine equivalents), PONV\u002Fantiemetic use, drain output, hospital stay, patient satisfaction. N=62 patients (31\u002Farm). Blinded outcome assessment.",[26,27,28],"Surgical Blood Loss","Postoperative Pain","Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery",[30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37],"Lumbar fusion","ESP block","PVI block","Intraoperative bleeding","Postoperative pain","WALANT","ropivacaine","epinephrine","RECRUITING","2026-04-19",{"date":41,"type":42},"2026-04-24","ACTUAL",{"date":44,"type":42},"2026-01-08",{"date":46,"type":20},"2028-03-01",{"name":48,"class":49},"Fundació Institut de Recerca de l'Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau","OTHER",{"id":51,"slug":52,"hasResults":11,"nctId":53,"briefTitle":54,"officialTitle":55,"acronym":56,"eligibilityCriteria":57,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":58,"enrollmentInfo":59,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":21,"phases":61,"briefSummary":62,"conditions":63,"keywords":66,"overallStatus":69,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":70,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":71,"startDateStruct":73,"completionDateStruct":75,"leadSponsor":77,"locationsCount":80},"100620859","single--versus-two-level-esp-block-for-analgesia-after-lumbar-stabilization-surgery-100620859","NCT07363096","Single- Versus Two-Level ESP Block for Analgesia After Lumbar Stabilization Surgery","Comparison Of Single- Versus Two-Level Erector Spinae Plane Block For Postoperative Analgesia In Patients Undergoing Lumbar Stabilization Surgery","ESP-Lumbar","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* ASA I-II-III,\n* BMI:18-40,\n* Patients undergoing lumbar stabilization surgery involving 2 to 4 vertebral levels\n* Patients who personally provide written informed consent to participate in the study\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with chronic pain conditions\n* Patients with a history of chronic opioid use\n* Patients undergoing emergency lumbar stabilization surgery","80 Years",{"count":60,"type":20},60,[23],"Lumbar stabilization surgery is commonly associated with moderate to severe postoperative pain. Effective pain control is important to improve patient comfort, early mobilization, and recovery. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block is a regional anesthesia technique that has been increasingly used for postoperative pain management in spine surgery.\n\nThis study aims to compare the effectiveness of single-level versus two-level ultrasound-guided ESP block for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing lumbar stabilization surgery. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive either a single-level ESP block or a two-level ESP block in addition to standard analgesic treatment.\n\nPostoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, and the incidence of side effects will be evaluated during the postoperative period. The results of this study may help determine the most effective ESP block technique for pain management after lumbar stabilization surgery.",[64,28,65],"Postoperative Pain Management","Erector Spina Plan Block",[67,68,64],"Erector Spina Plane Block","Acute Pain","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-01-15",{"date":72,"type":42},"2026-01-23",{"date":74,"type":20},"2026-02-01",{"date":76,"type":20},"2027-01-03",{"name":78,"class":79},"Ankara Etlik City Hospital","OTHER_GOV",1]