ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07593300Updated May 18, 2026

RISS Versus Lower Thoracic ESP Block for Analgesia After Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Trial

An interventional study of Group A (n=35): Ultrasound-guided RISS block (RISS): and Group B (n=35): Ultrasound-guided lower thoracic ESP block in Pain After Surgery, sponsored by Misr University for Science and Technology. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 60 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-05-18.

Sponsored by Misr University for Science and Technology · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
70
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 60 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to investigate the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided Romboid Intercostal and Subserratus (RISS) block versus lower thoracic Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) block after laparoscopic abdominal surgery. The main questions it aims to answer are:

Does ultrasound-guided Romboid Intercostal and Subserratus (RISS) block is effective as the lower thoracic Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) block for intra and postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic abdominal surgery for the first 24 hours? What complications do participants have when doing these interventions?

Researchers will compare the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided Romboid Intercostal and Subserratus (RISS) block with the lower thoracic Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) block after laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

Participants will:

Start general anesthesia and be given either block according to the randomization chart.

The blood pressure and heart rate will be measured at intervals to determine if the participants need extra intraoperative analgesics.

Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) will be used postoperatively to test pain severity.

Rescue morphine analgesia will be measured and compared in both groups.

Any complications will be reported.

Patient and surgeon satisfaction will be measured.

Read the detailed description

The aim of this study is to investigate the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided Romboid Intercostal and Subserratus (RISS) block versus lower thoracic Erector Spinae Plane (ESP) block after laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

Hypothesis

This study hypothesize that both RISS and ESP blocks relieve somatic pain equally, but ESP block relieves visceral pain better than RISS block, thereby reducing opioid consumption and improving patient satisfaction.

Methodology using:

I. Study design

Double-blinded randomized clinical trial study.

II. Study setting and location The study will be conducted at the operative theater of Souad Kafafi University Hospital (SKUH), Misr University for Science and Technology (MUST).

III. Study population:

Patients aged from 18 to 60 years old scheduled for laparoscopic abdominal surgery will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio after induction of general anesthesia, either:

Group A: Receiving ultrasound-guided RISS block. A solution composed of 20 ml mixed xylocaine 1% + 0.25% bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone on each side.

Group B: Receiving ultrasound-guided lower thoracic ESP block (T8-T9) A solution composed of 20 ml mixed xylocaine 1% + 0.25 % bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone on each side.

The infiltrative local anesthesia will be administered via a 22-gauge, 80-mm Echogenic block needle.

Postoperative analgesia:

The participants in both groups will receive analgesia in accordance with the following protocol:

  • Pain will be assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10.

    1. Mild pain (NRS 1-3) will be treated with 1 g paracetamol IV every six hours (maximum 4 g/day).
    2. Moderate pain (NRS 4-6) will receive the same paracetamol regimen plus ketorolac 30 mg IV every eight hours (maximum 120 mg/day).
    3. Severe pain (NRS 7-10) will receive the above plus 0.1 mg/kg IV morphine when indicated.

      Study outcomes:

      Primary Outcome Measure:

  • Efficacy of postoperative analgesia for first 24 hours.

Secondary Outcome Measures:

  • Total morphine equivalent consumption (mg) in 24 h.
  • Surgeon satisfaction (ability to perform active movements, 1-5 scale).
  • Patient satisfaction (1-5 scale).
  • Onset time of analgesia (min).
  • Duration of postoperative analgesia (time to first rescue).
  • Pain intensity via NRS at 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 h.
  • Intraoperative vital signs (HR, NIBP).
  • Possible complications (pneumothorax, LAST, and vascular puncture) intra- and post-operatively.

Sample size calculation The sample size calculation was performed using G. power 3.1.9.2 (Universität Kiel, Germany). The sample size was calculated according to the total morphine dose in 24hr (4.21 in RISS vs. 4.65 in ESP) according to previous studies (9, 10). Based on the following considerations: 0.05 α error and 80% power of the study. Four cases were added to overcome dropout. Therefore, 70 patients will be allocated.

Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis will be done by SPSS v26 (IBM Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Shapiro-Wilks test and histograms will be used to evaluate the normality of the distribution of data. Quantitative parametric variables will be presented as mean and standard deviation (SD) and compared between the two groups utilizing unpaired Student's t- test. Quantitative non-parametric data will be presented as median and interquartile range (IQR) and will be analyzed by Mann Whitney-test. Qualitative variables will be presented as frequency and percentage (%) and will be analyzed utilizing the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test when appropriate. A two tailed P value \< 0.05 will be considered statistically significant.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pain After Surgery

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Erector Spine Plane Block
  • Laparoscopic surgery
  • Rhomboid Intercostal block
03

In context

Pain

10,054 studies on the registry are indexed under Pain; 1,649 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 70 is close to the median of 66 across 8,493 interventional studies indexed under Pain.

Browse Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

Misr University for Science and Technology is the lead sponsor of 38 studies on the registry; 15 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 60 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients scheduled for laparoscopic abdominal surgery (e.g., cholecystectomy, colectomy, sleeve gastrectomy, hernia repair, appendectomy).
  • Age from 18 - 60 years old.
  • Both sexes.
  • American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification I, II. (i.e., : a normal healthy patient; ASA II: patients with mild controlled systemic disease.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients who refuse the research consent.
  • Allergy to local anesthetic drugs.
  • Cardiac arrhythmia.
  • Bleeding tendency (including pre-existing blood disease and patients on full anticoagulant therapy).
  • Morbid obese patients (>35 kg/m2)
  • Vascular compromise of lower extremity (e.g., Burger disease, Raynaud's disease).
  • Connective tissue disease (e.g., Scleroderma).
  • Suspected or intra-abdominal infection.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(3)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

ASA physical status

The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.

BMI (body mass index)

Weight in kilograms divided by height in metres squared. Example: 70 kg and 1.75 m gives 70 ÷ (1.75 × 1.75) ≈ 22.9.

What counts as overweight or obesity differs between countries (some use lower cut-offs), so go by the range the study states.

Cancer (malignancy)

Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.

Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
70 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Group A (n=35): Ultrasound-guided RISS block.

    The patient will be positioned in the lateral decubitus with the ipsilateral arm abducted to move the scapula laterally and open the intercostal and subscapular spaces. A high-frequency linear probe (10-14 MHz) will be applied 1-2 cm medial to the medial scapular border in an oblique-sagittal plane at the T5-T6 level. Using an in-plane approach, a 22 G, 80 mm block needle will be advanced from superomedial to inferolateral (cephalocaudal) until the tip lies between RM and ICM. After negative aspiration and hydrodissection with 1-2 ml saline, 10 ml of the prepared solution (1% lidocaine + 0.25% bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone) will be injected in 5 ml aliquots, with real-time observation of spread deep to RM. The probe will then be slid caudally and laterally to the T8-T9 level to visualize the fascial plane at the mid-axillary line between the serratus anterior (SA) muscle and the external intercostal muscle to inject the other 10 ml of local anesthetic.

    Procedure: Group A (n=35): Ultrasound-guided RISS block (RISS):

  • Active comparator
    Group B (n=35): Receiving ultrasound-guided lower thoracic ESP block

    The patient will be positioned laterally. A linear probe will be placed 3 cm lateral to the posterior midline at the T8-T9 level to identify the transverse process (TP) and erector spinae muscle (ESM). A 22 G, 80 mm Echogenic block needle will be advanced in-plane from cranial to caudal until the tip rests deep to ESM but superficial to the TP. After negative aspiration, 20 ml of the prepared solution (1% lidocaine + 0.25% bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone) will be injected in 5 ml aliquots, with real-time ultrasound confirmation of longitudinal spread cranially and caudally along the fascial plane. The block will be performed bilaterally following the same stepsA solution composed of 20 ml mixed xylocaine 1% + 0.25 % bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone on each side.

    Procedure: Group B (n=35): Ultrasound-guided lower thoracic ESP block

Interventions

  • ProcedureGroup A (n=35): Ultrasound-guided RISS block (RISS):

    The patient will be positioned in the lateral decubitus with the ipsilateral arm abducted to move the scapula laterally and open the intercostal and subscapular spaces. A high-frequency linear probe (10-14 MHz) will be applied 1-2 cm medial to the medial scapular border in an oblique-sagittal plane at the T5-T6 level. Using an in-plane approach, a 22 G, 80 mm block needle will be advanced from superomedial to inferolateral (cephalocaudal) until the tip lies between RM and ICM. After negative aspiration and hydrodissection with 1-2 ml saline, 10 ml of the prepared solution (1% lidocaine + 0.25% bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone) will be injected in 5 ml aliquots, with real-time observation of spread deep to RM. The probe will then be slid caudally and laterally to the T8-T9 level to visualize the fascial plane at the mid-axillary line between the serratus anterior (SA) muscle and the external intercostal muscle to inject the other 10 ml of local anesthetic.

  • ProcedureGroup B (n=35): Ultrasound-guided lower thoracic ESP block

    The patient will be positioned laterally. A linear probe will be placed 3 cm lateral to the posterior midline at the T8-T9 level to identify the transverse process (TP) and erector spinae muscle (ESM). A 22 G, 80 mm Echogenic block needle will be advanced in-plane from cranial to caudal until the tip rests deep to ESM but superficial to the TP. After negative aspiration, 20 ml of the prepared solution (1% lidocaine + 0.25% bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone) will be injected in 5 ml aliquots, with real-time ultrasound confirmation of longitudinal spread cranially and caudally along the fascial plane. The block will be performed bilaterally following the same stepsA solution composed of 20 ml mixed xylocaine 1% + 0.25 % bupivacaine + 4 mg dexamethasone on each side.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Postoperative analgesia

    Pain will be assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (0-10 scale). Will be measured by NRS at 0, 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours postoperative 1. Mild pain (NRS 1-3) will be treated with 1 g paracetamol IV every six hours (maximum 4 g/day). 2. Moderate pain (NRS 4-6) will receive the same paracetamol regimen plus ketorolac 30 mg IV every eight hours (maximum 120 mg/day). 3. Severe pain (NRS 7-10) will receive the above plus 0.1 mg/kg IV morphine when indicated.

    Time frame: from 0 to 24 hours postoperative

Secondary outcomes

  1. Total morphine consumption (mg) in 24 h.

    Doses of morphine given intravenous postoperatively according to severity of pain (NRS \> 6) during the first 24 hours postoperatively

    Time frame: from 0 to 24 hours postoperative

  2. Intra-operative vital signs (HR)

    Measuring the patient's heart rate (HR) before induction of anesthesia and every 15 minutes during surgery.

    Time frame: Before induction of anesthesia till the end of surgery

  3. • Intra-operative vital signs: Mean Blood Pressure (MBP)

    Measuring the patient's Mean Blood Pressure (MBP) before induction of anesthesia and every 15 minutes during surgery.

    Time frame: Before induction of anesthesia till the end of surgery

  4. Possible complications

    pneumothorax, LAST, vascular puncture

    Time frame: Intra- and post-operatively for 24 hours.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Souad Kafafi University Hospital (SKUH), Faculty of Medicine, MUST
    Giza, Giza Governorate 15525, Egypt
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Lin J, Wu H, Wen Z, Li Y, Jiang C, Lin B, Gu Y. Subserratus Anterior Plane Block vs Thoracic Paravertebral Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled, Double-Blind, Non-Inferiority Clinical Trial. J Pain Res. 2025 Mar 25;18:1615-1625. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S506226. eCollection 2025. PubMed 40161212 ↗
  • Wang S, Wang H, Chen X, Li M, Xu D. Ultrasound-Guided Continuous Rhomboid Intercostal and Sub-Serratus Plane Block Comparison of Thoracoscopic Intercostal Nerve Block After Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study. J Pain Res. 2024 Dec 21;17:4471-4481. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S484092. eCollection 2024. PubMed 39726901 ↗
  • Elsharkawy H, Maniker R, Bolash R, Kalasbail P, Drake RL, Elkassabany N. Rhomboid Intercostal and Subserratus Plane Block: A Cadaveric and Clinical Evaluation. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018 Oct;43(7):745-751. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000824. PubMed 30169476 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Demographic Information: Age, sex, race, and other relevant demographic details. Baseline Characteristics: Health status, medical history, and any pre-existing conditions prior to the trial. Treatment Assignment: Information on the intervention or treatment each participant received. Outcome Measures: Data on primary and secondary outcomes as defined in the trial protocol. Adverse Events: Reports of any side effects or adverse events experienced by participants during the trial. Follow-up Data: Information collected during follow-up periods, including long-term outcomes

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form

Time frame: may 2026 to December 2026

Access criteria: Researchers: Who: Academic researchers, industry scientists, and regulatory agencies. What: Full IPD, including demographic data, treatment assignments, and outcome measures. How: Through data sharing platforms or repositories after submitting a research proposal and obtaining necessary approvals. Regulatory Authorities: Who: Agencies like the FDA or EMA. What: Full IPD and supporting documentation for oversight and review. How: Direct access during the review process of clinical trial applications. Data Sharing Initiatives: Who: Collaborating institutions and consortia. What: Aggregated or anonymized IPD for meta-analyses or systematic reviews. How: Via established partnerships and shared databases. Public and Patient Advocacy Groups: Who: Organizations seeking to promote transparency. What: Summary data and aggregated results, but not individual-level data. How: Through publicly available reports or dashboards.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 18, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07593300
Lead sponsor
Misr University for Science and Technology
Responsible party
Emad Lotfy Mohammed Ahmed (lecturer of anesthesia, SICU and pain management, Faculty of medicine., Misr University for Science and Technology) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 18, 2026
Start date
May 20, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
May 18, 2026

Study contacts

Emad LM Ahmed, Lecturer
Contact
emad.ahmmed@must.edu.eg
+201006531896
Mohamed M Ahmed, Resident
Contact
Manmoh980@gmail.com
0201147888382
Manar M ElKholy, Profesor
study chair · Prof. of Anesth, Kasr Alainy hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University
Mohamed Abdelaziz Taha, Assist. Prof.
study director · Assist. Prof. of Anesth, Souad Kafafi University hospital, Faculty of Medicine, MUST
Ahmed SK Elkhodary, Lecturer
study director · Lecturer of surgery at Souad Kafafi University hospital, Faculty of Medicine, MUST

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in May 2026. 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