CClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT03794882Updated Sep 21, 2022Results posted

Impact of Quadratus Lumborum Block on Recovery Profile After Ventral Hernia Repair

A Phase 4 interventional study of Quadratus Lumborum Block and Standard Medical Management in Pain, Postoperative and Opioid Use, sponsored by University of Wisconsin, Madison. Terminated at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-09-21.

Sponsored by University of Wisconsin, Madison · Phase 4, Interventional, and Other

Why this study was terminated
administrative challenges and complications due to the COVID-19 pandemic
Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
14
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Ventral hernia repair may be associated with significant postoperative pain. Pain is typically managed with intravenous (IV) and oral medications that come with their own risks, such as nausea, constipation, sedation, respiratory depression, increased bleeding, and/or kidney or liver dysfunction. The quadratus lumborum peripheral nerve block has been shown to produce anesthesia of the anterior abdominal wall in the T7 to L1 distribution. This study aims to evaluate if the addition of the quadratus lumborum peripheral nerve block (QLB) can improve pain scores, decrease the need for IV and oral pain medications, and/or speed the patients' return to normal activity.

Read the detailed description

Current trends in perioperative pain management stress the importance of multimodal analgesia in an effort to reduce the dependence on opioid pain medications. Adverse effects of opioids include sedation, respiratory depression, nausea, vomiting, constipation, itching, and, most importantly, the potential for tolerance and abuse. Multimodal analgesia attempts to utilize multiple techniques, including medications and nerve block procedures, to improve postoperative analgesia. Improved postoperative pain control can enable an earlier return to normal activities for patients, not only improving patient satisfaction, but also reducing postoperative morbidity and adverse effects of opioids.

Approximately 350,000 to 500,000 ventral hernia repairs are performed each year in the United States. Surgeries completed laparoscopically are typically performed on an outpatient basis, allowing patients to return home the same day of surgery and treat their pain independently with prescribed pain medications. Utilization of a regional anesthesia technique may allow prolonged numbing of the nerves postoperatively and decrease the reliance on oral pain medications. Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks have been shown to decrease pain scores and opioid consumption following ventral hernia repair. Quadratus lumborum (QL) blocks are newer iterations of the TAP block.

There are currently three types of the QL block, all targeting the thoracolumbar fascia surrounding the quadratus lumborum muscle. Injection within this fascial plane may allow local anesthetic spread into the paravertebral space, possibly explaining why QL blocks have been mapped from the T7 to T12/L1 dermatomes, covering the entire abdomen. Conversely, TAP blocks have been mapped from the T10 to T12/L1 dermatomes, only covering the abdomen below the umbilicus. In the first, the Quadratus lumborum 1 block (QL1), the local anesthetic is injected within the fascial plane lateral to the QL muscle. In the second, the Quadratus lumborum 2 block (QL2), the needle trajectory is more superficial, and the local anesthetic is injected along the posterior border of the QL muscle. The third iteration, the Quadratus lumborum 3 block (QL3), involves a deeper, transmuscular approach with injection along the anterior border of the QL muscle. Our study would utilize the QL2 approach as the dermatomal distribution of the QL1 and QL2 blocks appear to be more widespread than the QL3 block, and the QL2 block may be a safer approach due to the more superficial angle of the needle 3.

Additionally, the QL block has been shown to have a longer duration of analgesia when directly compared to the TAP block. A study of pediatric lower abdominal surgery revealed improved pain scores and parent satisfaction with care in the QL group compared to TAP block. This improvement persisted to the 24 hour mark. In a study of postoperative pain following cesarean delivery, pain scores were improved and opioid consumption decreased with the QL block compared to the TAP block. The differences were not significant at the 1 and 6 hour marks, but were significant at the 12, 24 and 48 hour marks, highlighting the analgesic duration of the QL block 8.

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the QL block using the QL2 approach on recovery profile after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair, a commonly performed surgery, as well as contribute to the understanding of the block and its distribution of anesthesia.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pain, Postoperative
  • Opioid Use

Keywords

  • Hernia, Ventral
  • Pain, Postoperative
  • Opioid Use
  • Pain
03

In context

Hernia

1,096 studies on the registry are indexed under Hernia; 132 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 14 is below the median of 80 across 739 interventional studies indexed under Hernia.

Browse Hernia studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Wisconsin, Madison is the lead sponsor of 1,161 studies on the registry; 182 are open to participants now.

Of its 151 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 114 (75%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  1. The subject is scheduled for elective laparoscopic ventral hernia repair;
  2. The subject is ≥ 18 years and ≤ 80 years;
  3. The patient agrees to receive a quadratus lumborum block
  4. American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1-3.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Subject is \< 18 years of age or >80 years of age;
  2. Subject is non-English speaking;
  3. Subject is known or believed to be pregnant;
  4. Subject is a prisoner;
  5. Subject has impaired decision-making capacity per discretion of the Investigator;
  6. Significant renal, cardiac or hepatic disease per discretion of the investigator;
  7. American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4-5;
  8. Known hypersensitivity and/or allergies to local anesthetics;
  9. Chronic opioid use (daily or almost daily use of opioids for > 3 months at any point in their lives).
  10. Repair of a recurrent ventral hernia
  11. Repair of multiple ventral hernias
  12. Unobtainable sonographic views
  13. Lacking health insurance
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
14 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    QLB + Medical Management

    Subjects will undergo Intervention: Procedure/Surgery: Quadratus Lumborum Block and receive Intervention: Procedure: Standard Medical Management as needed.

    Combination Product: Quadratus Lumborum Block · Procedure: Standard Medical Management

  • Active comparator
    Standard Medical Management

    Subjects will receive Intervention: Procedure: Standard Medical Management as needed.

    Procedure: Standard Medical Management

Interventions

  • Combination productQuadratus Lumborum Block

    30 mL of .25% bupivacaine with 2.5mcg/mL epinephrine will be injected on both sides of the mid-abdomen posterior to the mid-axillary line.

    Also known as: QLB

  • ProcedureStandard Medical Management

    Standard medical management typically includes perioperative multimodal analgesia utilizing acetaminophen, opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and dexamethasone

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Postoperative Day (POD) 1 Pain Score

    Pain Score assessed on POD 1 using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10) where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: 24 hours

Secondary outcomes

  1. Pain Score at Rest

    Pain at rest in PACU, and on POD 1, 2, 7 using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10) where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7

  2. Pain Score With Activity

    Pain with activity in PACU and on POD 1, 2, 7 assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10) where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable.

    Time frame: PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7

  3. Opioid Consumption in Oral Morphine Milligram Equivalent (OMME)

    Opioid Consumption in morphine equivalents in PACU and on POD, 1, 2, 7.

    Time frame: PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7

  4. Location of Most Severe Pain

    Location of most severe pain on assessed by questioning the patient in PACU and on POD 1, 2, 7.

    Time frame: PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7

  5. Time in PACU

    Duration of patients' time in PACU.

    Time frame: 48 hours

  6. Postoperative Time to Discharge

    Total postoperative time until discharge.

    Time frame: 72 hours

  7. Numbness Distribution in PACU

    For patients that underwent QLB, numbness to ice will be assessed by filling a plastic glove with ice water and systematically assessing numbness to cold in the thoracic and lumbar dermatomes by comparing these sites with a reference point.

    Time frame: 12 hours

  8. Number of Participants Who Report Nausea in PACU

    Patient will be questioned to assess if they have nausea in PACU.

    Time frame: 12 hours

  9. Total Antiemetic Consumption on POD 0 and in PACU

    Total consumption of antiemetics on POD 0 and in PACU.

    Time frame: 12 hours

  10. Number of Participants With Presence of Nausea Necessitating Treatment

    Patient will be questioned to assess if they had nausea necessitating treatment on POD 1, 2, and 7

    Time frame: POD1, POD2, POD7

  11. Rating of Satisfaction With Perioperative Care

    Satisfaction with perioperative care on POD 1, 2, and 7 measured by a Numerical Rating Scale (0-10) with 0 representing no satisfaction and 10 representing high satisfaction.

    Time frame: POD1, POD2, POD7

  12. Total Non-Opioid Analgesic Consumption in PACU: Measured in Milligrams

    Total consumption of Non-Opioid Analgesics in the PACU.

    Time frame: 12 hours

  13. Additional Analgesics in Milliliters Administered in the Operating Room

    This measure describes the amount, in milliliters, of non-opioid analgesics administered in the Operating Room.

    Time frame: 6 hours

  14. Additional Analgesics in Milligrams Administered in the Operating Room

    This measure describes the amount, in milligrams, of non-opioid analgesics administered in the Operating Room.

    Time frame: 6 hours

07

Results

Posted Sep 21, 2022
Limitations and caveats
This study was terminated early due to the combined effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the switching of the primary location for the procedure from UW Hospital to East Madison Hospital.

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Started86
Completed86
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryPostoperative Day (POD) 1 Pain Score

Pain Score assessed on POD 1 using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10) where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable.

Time frame:
24 hours
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Postoperative Day (POD) 1 Pain Score
score on a scaleQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Postoperative Day (POD) 1 Pain Score3.7857 ± 1.6434.015 ± 2.291
SecondaryPain Score at Rest

Pain at rest in PACU, and on POD 1, 2, 7 using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10) where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable.

Time frame:
PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Pain Score at Rest
score on a scaleQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Pain Score at Rest PACU7.5833 ± 2.2247.12 ± 1.443
Pain at Rest POD 13.88 ± 1.643.50 ± 2.25
Pain at Rest POD 23.33 ± 0.963.00 ± 1.73
Pain at Rest POD 71.43 ± 1.031.57 ± 1.34
SecondaryPain Score With Activity

Pain with activity in PACU and on POD 1, 2, 7 assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10) where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst pain imaginable.

Time frame:
PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Pain Score With Activity
score on a scaleQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Pain Score with Activity POD 17.07 ± 2.206.75 ± 1.97
Pain Score with Activity POD 27.00 ± 2.575.58 ± 1.41
Pain Score with Activity POD 73.5712 ± 2.0123.670 ± 1.155
SecondaryOpioid Consumption in Oral Morphine Milligram Equivalent (OMME)

Opioid Consumption in morphine equivalents in PACU and on POD, 1, 2, 7.

Time frame:
PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7
Reported as:
Mean · OMME
Opioid Consumption in Oral Morphine Milligram Equivalent (OMME)
OMMEQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Opioid Consumption in PACU28.93 ± 25.6536.64 ± 16.70
Opioid Consumption POD 124.58 ± 15.3119.50 ± 2.89
Opioid Consumption POD 227.50 ± 17.0020.50 ± 5.77
Opioid Consumption POD 758 ± 79.8866.5 ± 37.27
SecondaryLocation of Most Severe Pain

Location of most severe pain on assessed by questioning the patient in PACU and on POD 1, 2, 7.

Time frame:
PACU, POD1, POD2, POD7
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Location of Most Severe Pain
ParticipantsQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
PACU — around navel42
PACU — incision area22
PACU — abdomen00
PACU — navel01
PACU — stomach area00
PACU — middle of abomen00
PACU — middle00
POD 1 — around navel00
POD 1 — incision area22
POD 1 — abdomen22
POD 1 — navel00
POD 1 — stomach area10
POD 1 — middle of abomen10
POD 1 — middle10
POD 2 — around navel11
POD 2 — incision area32
POD 2 — abdomen12
POD 2 — navel00
POD 2 — stomach area01
POD 2 — middle of abomen20
POD 2 — middle00
POD 7 — around navel00
POD 7 — incision area32
POD 7 — abdomen02
POD 7 — navel01
POD 7 — stomach area20
POD 7 — middle of abomen00
POD 7 — middle00
SecondaryTime in PACU

Duration of patients' time in PACU.

Time frame:
48 hours
Reported as:
Mean · minutes
Time in PACU
minutesQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Time in PACU66.63 ± 28.5864.33 ± 26.82
SecondaryPostoperative Time to Discharge

Total postoperative time until discharge.

Time frame:
72 hours
Reported as:
Mean · hours
Postoperative Time to Discharge
hoursQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Postoperative Time to Discharge66.625 ± 28.5866.60 ± 26.82
SecondaryNumbness Distribution in PACU

For patients that underwent QLB, numbness to ice will be assessed by filling a plastic glove with ice water and systematically assessing numbness to cold in the thoracic and lumbar dermatomes by comparing these sites with a reference point.

Time frame:
12 hours

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryNumber of Participants Who Report Nausea in PACU

Patient will be questioned to assess if they have nausea in PACU.

Time frame:
12 hours
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants Who Report Nausea in PACU
ParticipantsQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Number of Participants Who Report Nausea in PACU20
SecondaryTotal Antiemetic Consumption on POD 0 and in PACU

Total consumption of antiemetics on POD 0 and in PACU.

Time frame:
12 hours

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryNumber of Participants With Presence of Nausea Necessitating Treatment

Patient will be questioned to assess if they had nausea necessitating treatment on POD 1, 2, and 7

Time frame:
POD1, POD2, POD7
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Number of Participants With Presence of Nausea Necessitating Treatment
ParticipantsQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
POD 154
POD 200
POD 700
SecondaryRating of Satisfaction With Perioperative Care

Satisfaction with perioperative care on POD 1, 2, and 7 measured by a Numerical Rating Scale (0-10) with 0 representing no satisfaction and 10 representing high satisfaction.

Time frame:
POD1, POD2, POD7
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Rating of Satisfaction With Perioperative Care
score on a scaleQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Rating of Satisfaction with perioperative care POD 18.60 ± 0.979.20 ± 1.14
Rating of Satisfaction with perioperative care POD 28.83 ± 0.969.17 ± 1.91
Rating of Satisfaction with perioperative care POD 79.21 ± 1.0968.61 ± 1.768
SecondaryTotal Non-Opioid Analgesic Consumption in PACU: Measured in Milligrams

Total consumption of Non-Opioid Analgesics in the PACU.

Time frame:
12 hours
Reported as:
Mean · milligrams
Total Non-Opioid Analgesic Consumption in PACU: Measured in Milligrams
milligramsQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Ketorolac0 ± 05 ± 12.25
lidocaine in mg0 ± 00 ± 0
acetaminophen in mg235.71 ± 415.04333.33 ± 440.17
SecondaryAdditional Analgesics in Milliliters Administered in the Operating Room

This measure describes the amount, in milliliters, of non-opioid analgesics administered in the Operating Room.

Time frame:
6 hours
Reported as:
Mean · milliliters
Additional Analgesics in Milliliters Administered in the Operating Room
millilitersQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Additional Analgesics in Milliliters Administered in the Operating Room0 ± 015.00 ± 16.43
SecondaryAdditional Analgesics in Milligrams Administered in the Operating Room

This measure describes the amount, in milligrams, of non-opioid analgesics administered in the Operating Room.

Time frame:
6 hours
Reported as:
Mean · milligrams
Additional Analgesics in Milligrams Administered in the Operating Room
milligramsQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
Ketorolac8.57 ± 8.022.50 ± 6.12
Acetaminophen166.67 ± 408.250 ± 0
Propofol0.00 ± 0.0028.33 ± 69.40
lidocaine17.50 ± 36.1520.00 ± 40.00

Adverse events

Collected over up to Post-operative day 7 (POD7). Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
QLB + Medical Management0/8 (0%)0/8 (0%)0/8 (0%)
Standard Medical Management0/6 (0%)0/6 (0%)1/6 (16.7%)
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventQLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical Management
incision site bleedingGeneral disorders0/81/6
tirednessGeneral disorders0/81/6

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)QLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical ManagementTotal
Mean49.38 (25 to 68)56.17 (40 to 67)54.69 (25 to 68)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)QLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical ManagementTotal
Female336
Male538
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)QLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical ManagementTotal
Hispanic or Latino000
Not Hispanic or Latino000
Unknown or Not Reported8614
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)QLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical ManagementTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native000
Asian000
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American000
White000
More than one race000
Unknown or Not Reported8614
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)QLB + Medical ManagementStandard Medical ManagementTotal
United States8614
08

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics
    Madison, Wisconsin 53792, United States
09

References and documents

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Aug 26, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 21, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03794882
Lead sponsor
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 7, 2019
Start date
May 6, 2019
Primary completion
Mar 12, 2020
Completion
Mar 12, 2020
Results posted
Sep 21, 2022
Last update
Sep 21, 2022

Study contacts

Kristin Bevil, MD
principal investigator · Anesthesiology Department, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, Wisconsin, United States,53792.

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Aug 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion