MedTrace Logo

ESP Versus PIFB for Analgesia in Open Cardiac Surgery: a Randomized Control Trial

NCT06322810 · Status: RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 80

Last updated 2026-02-24

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

This clinical trial compares analgesia efficiency and recovery outcomes between two different fascial plane block techniques (ESPB vs.PIFB) in cardiac surgery patients participant population/health conditions\].

The main questions it aims to answer are:

* Does ESPB provide superior analgesia than PIFB
* Do patients who receive ESPB have better recovery outcomes

Conditions

  • Analgesia

Interventions

PROCEDURE

Erector spinae plane block (ESPB)

Bilateral ESP: 0.5% ropivacaine 0.3 ml per kg (ideal body weight) each side, 30 min before skin excision. After surgery, use pump to deliver an intermittent automatic bolus of 0.3 ml per kg 0.16% ropivacaine every 4 hours each side.

PROCEDURE

Pecto-intercostal fascial plane blok (PIFB)

Bilateral PIFB: 0.5% ropivacaine 0.3 ml per kg (ideal body weight) each side, 30 min before skin excision. After surgery, use pump to deliver an intermittent automatic bolus of 0.3 ml per kg 0.16% ropivacaine every 4 hours each side.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Taichung Veterans General Hospital

    lead OTHER

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2024-11-08
Primary Completion
2026-12-31
Completion
2026-12-31

Countries

  • Taiwan

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT06322810 on ClinicalTrials.gov