Obstetric anesthesia

The analgesic effects of novel fascial plane blocks compared with intrathecal morphine after Caesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Br J AnaesthPublished Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

Pooled result · Rest pain at 6 h (VAS)Result — go to the resultMD 1.21 cm 95% CI 0.42–2.00

Authors' conclusion

Quadratus lumborum block, rather than erector spinae or transversus abdominus plane blocks, may be a better intrathecal morphine alternative owing to similar post-Caesarean analgesic effects and reduced opioid-related side-effects.

Study context

Population
Caesarean delivery
Participants
1,525 participants · 18 trials
Comparison
Fascial plane blocks vs intrathecal morphine after Caesarean delivery
Outcome
Rest pain intensity on VAS 0–10 cm (10 cm = severe pain)
Follow-up
6 h
Methodological detailsHartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects, Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)
  • Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects
  • GRADE

Pooled result

Rest pain at 6 h (VAS)

MD

1.21 cm

95% CI 0.42–2.00

P = 0.01

Intrathecal morphine vs TAP block
MD 1.21 cm (95% CI 0.42–2.00); P = 0.01

As reported in the abstract

Further pooled results

OutcomeMD (cm) (95% CI)P value
Rest pain at 12 h (VAS)Intrathecal morphine vs TAP block · I2=86%; HKSJ CI; intrathecal morphine superior1.03 (0.05–2.01)P = 0.04

Rest pain at 12 h (visual analogue scale (VAS))

No differences in pain at 12 h between quadratus lumborum (QL) or erector spinae plane (ESP) block and intrathecal morphine

Other secondary outcomes

No differences in other outcomes
  • GRADE certainty of evidence low across pooled outcomes

Safety

OutcomeOR (95% CI)P value
Nausea and vomitingTAP block vs Intrathecal morphine0.41 (0.21–0.79)P = 0.01
Nausea and vomitingQL block vs Intrathecal morphine0.33 (0.23–0.48)P = 0.002

Original publication

The analgesic effects of novel fascial plane blocks compared with intrathecal morphine after Caesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. Published 11 March 2025. doi:10.1016/j.bja.2025.01.032

Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →

Get them every week

New studies on this topic in My Week and in your Monday e-mail.

We e-mail you a sign-in link and a code. No password, no spam.