Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine for surgical site infiltration in lumbar fusion: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION

Effective postoperative pain control after lumbar spine surgery remains challenging, and excessive opioid use is associated with adverse outcomes. Evidence comparing liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with conventional long-acting local anesthetics in spine surgery is limited.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

In this single-center, prospective, randomized, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded trial, adult undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion were assigned (1:1) to surgical site infiltration with either LB (266 mg) plus 25 mg plain bupivacaine (LB group) or ropivacaine (R group). The primary outcome was 72 h cumulative opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents, MME). Secondary outcomes included time-profile opioid consumption, pain scores, rescue analgesia, safety, and functional recovery.

RESULTS

A total of 202 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Cumulative MME within 72 h was significantly lower in the LB group compared with the R group [43.0 (37.0, 58.0) mg vs. 58.0 (46.0, 73.0) mg], corresponding to a 22% relative reduction (GMR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.85; p < 0.001). The reduction was most pronounced during 8-24 h and 24-48 h postoperatively. Overall pain scores at rest and with movement, as well as 72-h pain AUC, were lower in the LB group. No significant between-group differences were observed in rescue analgesia, adverse events and functional recovery.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing one- or two-level posterior lumbar decompression and fusion, surgical site infiltration with an LB-based combined regimen, compared with ropivacaine monotherapy, reduced 72-h opioid consumption and cumulative postoperative pain burden without an observed increase in adverse events or impairment of early functional recovery.