The analgesic efficacy of pre‐operative bilateral erector spinae plane ( <scp>ESP</scp> ) blocks in patients having ventral hernia repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair is an operation associated with significant postoperative pain, and regional anaesthetic techniques are of potential benefit. The erector spinae plane (ESP) block performed at the level of the T5 transverse process has recently been described for thoracic surgery, and we hypothesised that performing the ESP block at a lower vertebral level would provide effective abdominal analgesia. We performed pre-operative bilateral ESP blocks with 20-30 ml ropivacaine 0.5% at the level of the T7 transverse process in four patients undergoing laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Median (range) 24-h opioid consumption was 18.7 mg (0.0-43.0 mg) oral morphine. The highest and lowest median (range) pain scores in the first 24 h were 3.5 (3.0-5.0) and 2.5 (0.0-3.0) on an 11-point numerical rating scale. We also performed the block in a fresh cadaver and assessed the extent of injectate spread using computerised tomography. There was radiographic evidence of spread extending cranially to the upper thoracic levels and caudally as far as the L2-L3 transverse processes. We conclude that the ESP block is a promising regional anaesthetic technique for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair and other abdominal surgery when performed at the level of the T7 transverse process. Its advantages are the ability to block both supra-umbilical and infra-umbilical dermatomes with a single-level injection and its relative simplicity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".