Various analgesic modalities are employed for pediatric perioperative pain control. Combined general-regional anesthesia is a common practice for pediatric surgeries. The introduction of ultrasound guidance for regional interventions has demonstrated several benefits, including increased safety and improved outcomes (
12,
14). This study compared the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided (USG) caudal block with 1.25 mL/kg of 0.125% bupivacaine versus USG ESPB with 0.5 mL/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine in pediatric cancer patients undergoing renal and suprarenal resection surgeries. The volumes and concentrations were chosen to mitigate any potential local anesthetic toxicity associated with higher volumes or concentrations.
Caudal analgesia has been one of the most commonly used blocks in pediatric surgeries for decades, while ESPB is a relatively recent technique that has rapidly gained popularity in both adults and pediatrics. The current study demonstrated more hemodynamic stability with ESPB, with comparable postoperative pain scores between the two interventions, as well as a comparable time to receive the first postoperative analgesia (15.0 ± 3.0 and 14.4 ± 2.3 hours for the caudal and ESPB groups, respectively). However, morphine consumption in the first 24 hours was higher for the ESPB group (1.61 ± 0.33 mg) compared to the caudal group (1.21 ± 0.66 mg). Thus, we could not declare the non-inferiority of ESPB compared to the caudal block.
In a study conducted by Elshazly et al. comparing the analgesic effect of lumbar USG ESPB to caudal analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing hip and proximal femur surgeries, they concluded that ESPB did not provide a superior analgesic effect compared to caudal analgesia. They reported a prolonged duration before the first postoperative analgesic administration for the caudal group, while our study reported lower total postoperative morphine consumption for the ESPB group compared to the caudal group (
15).
In a study by Abotaleb et al. comparing caudal block to ESPB for pediatric lower limb surgeries, their results showed a superior analgesic effect of ESPB over the caudal block. These results were explained by lower pain scores, extended analgesia, and less postoperative analgesic consumption for the ESPB group. In accordance with our findings, they reported that ESPB showed more stable hemodynamics compared to the caudal block (
14).
However, we observed different results regarding the analgesic effects, which might be attributed to the different volumes used in each study. In our study, we injected 0.5 mL/kg of local anesthetic at the level of T7, which in a child with an average weight of 14 kg resulted in a total volume of approximately 7 mL of injectate. In contrast, the other study injected 20 mL beneath the erector spinae muscles at the level of L1-L4.
In 2024, Pandey et al. published a study comparing the analgesic efficacy of USG ESPB with 0.5 mL/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine versus USG caudal block with 1 mL/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine in pediatric patients undergoing abdominal surgeries. They reported that ESPB, as part of multimodal analgesia, can be considered safe in pediatric patients undergoing abdominal surgeries but showed an inferior analgesic profile compared to caudal analgesia. They explained their results by the higher FLACC scores and a greater percentage of patients requiring analgesia in the ESPB group, with a shorter duration for the first postoperative analgesic request (
16).
In another study conducted by Abdelrazik et al., they concluded the superiority of ESPB with 0.4 mL/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine compared to caudal block with 2.5 mg/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine in patients aged 2 to 6 years who underwent unilateral lower abdominal surgeries. They reported lower pain scores for the ESPB, with a longer duration of postoperative analgesia and lower postoperative analgesic requirements (
17).
Mostafa et al. assessed the efficacy of bilateral ESPB with 0.3 mL/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine for perioperative pain control in pediatric patients undergoing midline incision. They reported lower intraoperative and postoperative analgesic requirements with better pain scores in the first postoperative 8 hours (
18).
The results of Guan et al. on pediatric patients undergoing unilateral hernia repair showed a superior analgesic profile of ESPB with an injection of 0.5 mL/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine compared to caudal block with 1 mL/kg of 0.2% ropivacaine. They reported a longer duration to receive postoperative analgesia for the ESPB group compared to the caudal group, with lower postoperative FLACC scores. The differences between their study and ours are mainly in the type of surgery and the volume injected for the caudal block (
19).
In our study, although we could not prove the non-inferiority of ESPB compared to the caudal block, we support that ESPB can be used as a reliable, effective alternative to caudal analgesia. Erector spinae plane block has the advantage of comparable pain reduction and duration of postoperative analgesia. Additionally, the risk of inadvertent intravascular injection is considered very low with ESPB compared to the caudal block due to the anatomical differences between the targeted areas of block injection, which increases the reliability and safety of ESPB as an alternative to the caudal block.
5.1. Conclusions
When compared to USG caudal analgesia, USG ESPB showed more hemodynamic stability but had increased postoperative morphine consumption with a comparable first-time to postoperative analgesic requirement and postoperative FLACC scores. Therefore, we could not declare the non-inferiority of ESPB compared to the caudal block.
5.2. Limitation
This trial's limitations include its single-center design and the limited number of patients. We believe that further studies involving a larger patient population, a multicentric approach, and different types of surgeries could help in evaluating the efficacy and safety of USG ESPB in the pediatric patient population.