Erector spinae plane block for cancer pain relief: a systematic review

Despite advances in pain management, cancer-related pain remains a critical issue for many patients. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the use of fascial plane blocks, such as the Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB), for managing chronic pain, including in the oncology field. We conducted a systematic review to synthetize existing evidence on the use of ESPB for cancer pain management.

We selected studies published between January 2016 to April 2024. A systematic search in Pubmed and Embase databases was performed. The search strategy included the following keywords and/or MeSH terms according to the controlled vocabulary of the databases sought: ((erector spinae plane block) OR (ESP block) OR (ESPB) AND ((cancer pain). We considered eligible Randomized, nonrandomized studies, case series and case reports reporting data on the use of ESPB in patients with cancer pain.

The search revealed 34 studies. Among these, we found one RCT, three retrospective studies, two case series, and 28 case reports for a total of 135 patients. Studies included described the use of ESPB for the management of various types of cancer pain across different conditions, including chronic thoracic cancer-related pain, abdominal visceral pain and pain related to bone metastases. Single-shot ESPB was performed in 26 studies while continuous ESPB and the use of a peripheral nerve catheter for continuous analgesia were described in 8 studies. Neurolytic ESPB was performed in 6 studies for a total of 10 patients There was a high clinical heterogeneity in terms of technique, drugs, and use of adjuvants. The lack of comparators was a major flaw, together with the low level of evidence in the majority of the included studies.

The evidence supporting the use of ESPB for cancer pain management is currently scarce, heterogeneous, and of low quality. To better understand its potential and provide robust clinical guidance, future research needs to focus on rigorous comparative studies, standardization of techniques and larger sample sizes.