Article Text
PDF
Abstract
A brief systematic review was conducted to assess the effectiveness of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) as an analgesic option for adults attending the emergency department with renal colic. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched, and supplementary searches undertaken using Google Scholar and PubMed Medical Subject Headings. Two randomised controlled trials, two case series, one meta-analysis and one individual case were identified. Patient details, key results and study limitations were recorded in table format. Our findings support the use of ESPB as an effective form of analgesia in renal colic for initial treatment and refractory pain. Further studies should include a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the suitability of ESPB for everyday management of renal colic.
- Emergency Medicine
- pain management
- local
- renal
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Handling editor Richard Body
Contributors Both AB and MK contributed equally to this paper and are joint first authors. AB is the guarantor author. AI was used to create a formula to calculate the age standard deviations for the case reports outlined in table 1. The AI platform used was ChatGTP.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Disclaimer Best Evidence Topic reports (BETs) summarise the evidence pertaining to particular clinical questions. They are not systematic reviews, but rather contain the best (highest level) evidence that can be practically obtained by busy practising clinicians. The search strategies used to find the best evidence are reported in detail in order to allow clinicians to update searches whenever necessary. Each BET is based on a clinical scenario and ends with a clinical bottom line which indicates, in the light of the evidence found, what the reporting clinician would do if faced with the same scenario again. This BET was first published on the BestBETs website at http://www.bestbets.org and has been reproduced with permission.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer-reviewed.