An interventional study of control group and MCP group in Cervical Spine Surgery, sponsored by Zagazig University. Recruiting at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 21 Years to 60 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-07-17.
Sponsored by Zagazig University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Major spine surgery with multilevel instrumentation is followed by a large amount of opioid consumption, significant pain, and difficult mobilization Pain is one of the main factors limiting ambulation, increasing the risk of thromboembolism by immobility, and causing metabolic changes that affect other systems. Therefore, individualized pain management with the use of appropriate analgesic techniques is of paramount importance. Moreover, early intervention in rehabilitation aiming at a better postoperative recovery may reduce the length of hospital stay and return to daily activity. Effective pain management is one of the crucial components in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS).
Numerous regional anesthetic techniques have been used to provide analgesia following cervical spine surgery, including patient-controlled epidural analgesia, cervical paravertebral block, cervical plexus block, cervical erector spinae plane blocks, and local infiltration analgesia, however, each of these techniques has specific limitations that prevent them from being the analgesic technique of choice for such surgeries.
Up to the author's knowledge, there is no study done to compare multifidus cervicis plane block versus inter-semispinal plane block in a randomized controlled clinical trial as preemptive analgesia in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery.
Spine surgeries are commonly associated with severe postoperative pain, particularly complex procedures such as laminectomy on more than two disc levels, or scoliosis surgery, especially on the first postoperative day. Spinal foraminal stenosis and disc herniation, occurring often around C5-C7 levels, are the most popular underlying pathologies of the cervical spine.
One of the keys to a patient's recovery following cervical spine surgery is effective postoperative pain management. Nowadays, the concept of pain management with multimodal analgesia and regional anesthesia plays a crucial role in postoperative analgesia reducing opioid consumption and improving early mobilization. Numerous regional anesthetic techniques have been used, including patient-controlled epidural analgesia, cervical paravertebral block, cervical plexus block, cervical erector spinae plane blocks, and local infiltration analgesia. However, some of these techniques have specific limitations that prevent them from being the analgesic technique of choice for cervical spine surgery, and the others are still under research for its effectiveness.
Several new paraspinal blocks have been described in the thoracic and lumbar regions in which the dorsal rami of cervical nerves can be blocked without the block needle entering the paravertebral space. Moreover, novel cervical region blocks, including cervical interfascial plane (CIP) block, multifidus cervicis plane block (MCP), inter-semispinal plane (ISP) block, and retrolaminar cervical block have been developed. All these interfascial plane blocks are considered as promising alternatives to neuraxial blockade for various surgeries.
Multifidus cervicis plane (MCP) block First described by Ohgoshi et al. as a case report for analgesia after cervical laminoplasty, where the local anesthetic was injected between the multifidus cervicis and semispinalis cervicis muscles fascial planes at C5 level. Furthermore, MCP block was effective in another study as a treatment for cervicogenic headaches.
The inter-semispinal plane (ISP) block is also described by Ohgoshi et al., by injecting local anesthetic into the fascial plane between the semispinalis cervicis and capitis muscles and it effectively blocked multiple dorsal rami of the cervical spinal nerves in healthy volunteers.
This study will be designed for evaluation and comparison between Multifidus cervicis and inter-semispinal plane blocks as pre-emptive analgesia for patients undergoing cervical spine surgery under general anesthesia.
1,190 studies on the registry are indexed under Agnosia; 508 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 105 is above the median of 78 across 1,024 interventional studies indexed under Agnosia.
Browse Agnosia studies →Zagazig University is the lead sponsor of 447 studies on the registry; 75 are open to participants now.
Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Patient acceptance.
Exclusion Criteria:
History of allergy to the LA agents used in this study
patients will be operated under general anesthesia
Procedure: control group
patients will receive MCP block followed by general anesthesia
Procedure: MCP group
patients will receive ISP block followed by general anesthesia
Procedure: ISP group
patients will be operated under general anesthesia
patients will receive ultrasound-guided MCP block with 15 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% on each side followed by general anesthesia.
patients will receive ultrasound-guided ISP block with 15 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% on each side followed by general anesthesia.
changes in Visual analogue scale (VAS)score
On a scale of 0-10, the patient will learn to quantify postoperative pain where 0= No pain and 10= Maximum worst pain
Time frame: measured at 1 hour, 3 hours,6 hours,12hours,18hours, 24 hours postoperatively
Total dose of rescue analgesia
once the VAS score will be ≥ 3, rescue analgesia in the form of 0.1 mg/kg nalbuphine will be given and the total dose consumed will be recorded
Time frame: in the first 24 hour postoperatively
the first time to rescue analgesia
the time from the end of operation to patient reporting VAS ≥ 3
Time frame: in the first 24 hour postoperatively
Plan to share: Yes — planned after the completion of the study and publication
Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf, Csr, Analytic code
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
Zagazig University