QL Block in Laparoscopic Myomectomy (NCT05979493) | Clinical Trial Compass
RecruitingPhase 4
QL Block in Laparoscopic Myomectomy
United States80 participantsStarted 2024-08-24
Plain-language summary
This study aims to determine the efficacy of a quadratus lumborum (QL) block in decreasing postoperative pain in patients undergoing myomectomy for uterine fibroids. A QL block is a temporary anesthetic injection in the quadratus lumborum muscle, a muscle in the lower back, that has been previously shown to significantly reduce postoperative pain levels in patients undergoing abdominal and pelvic surgery. Because of its demonstrated effects, the QL block is becoming a standard of anesthesia and surgical care. Since participants will be undergoing a myomectomy procedure, the investigators believe that participants may qualify to participate in this study. The investigators will be comparing patients who receive the QL block (in addition to standard anesthesia and postoperative pain care) with patients who do not receive the QL block (in addition to standard care). The participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups and may or may not actually receive the block.
Who can participate
Age range
18 Years – 45 Years
Sex
FEMALE
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion Criteria:
* Presence of uterine fibroids requiring surgical excision with preservation of the uterus
* Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study
* Provision of signed and dated informed consent form
Exclusion Criteria:
* Pre-existing diagnoses of anxiety or depression
* Pre-existing coagulopathies
* Pre-existing neuropathic or chronic pelvic pain
* Chronic opioid use
* Illiteracy due to inability to read and understand plain questionnaire
* Non-English speaking
* BMI \>38
Questions worth asking your doctor
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
Questions for the trial coordinator
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
What they're measuring
1
Time in minutes from first analgesic request as measured by medical chart review
Timeframe: Up to 24 hours
2
Total number of doses of rescue analgesics given as measured by medical chart review