Intra-articular bupivacaine after joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled studies

Comparison of the pericapsular nerve group block with the intra-articular and quadratus lumborum blocks in primary total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block, quadratus lumborum block (QLB), and intra-articular (IA) local anesthetic injection have been shown to provide effective analgesia in total hip arthroplasty (THA). This randomized study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy, motor protection, and quality of recovery associated with the PENG block, QLB, and IA injection.

METHODS

Eighty-nine patients who underwent a unilateral primary THA under spinal anesthesia were randomly assigned to the PENG (n=30), QLB (n=30), or IA (n=29) group. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) score over the first 48 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption, quadriceps and adductor muscle strength, and quality of recovery (QoR-40).

RESULTS

The dynamic (with movement) NRS scores at 3 and 6 h postoperatively were significantly lower in the PENG and QLB groups compared to the IA group (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, respectively). The time to first opioid analgesia requirement was longer in the PENG and QLB groups than in the IA group (P = 0.009 and P = 0.016, respectively). A provided better preservation was found in the the PENG group than in the QLB group in terms of quadriceps muscle strength at 3 h postoperatively (P = 0.007) and time to mobilization (P = 0.003). No significant differences in the QoR-40 scores were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

The PENG and QLB groups showed similar analgesic effects and both showed more effective analgesia 6 h postoperatively than the IA group. All the groups showed similar postoperative quality of recovery.

Motor-sparing peripheral nerve blocks for hip and knee surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the recent literature describing and comparing novel motor-sparing peripheral nerve block techniques for hip and knee surgery. This topic is relevant because the number of patients undergoing same day discharge after hip and knee surgery is increasing. Preserving lower extremity muscle function is essential to facilitate early physical therapy for these patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Distal peripheral nerve blocks may allow for preserved quadriceps motor strength and comparable analgesia to traditional techniques. However, few studies in hip and knee populations include strength or function as primary outcomes. For hip surgeries, studies have failed to show analgesic differences between regional blocks and periarticular infiltration. Similarly for knee arthroplasty in the absence of periarticular infiltration, recent evidence suggests adding combinations of blocks (ACB plus iPACK or genicular nerve blocks) may balance pain control and early ambulation.

SUMMARY

The use of motor-sparing peripheral nerve block techniques enables early ambulation, adequate pain control, and avoidance of opioid-related side effects facilitating outpatient/ambulatory lower extremity surgery. Further studies of these techniques for continuous peripheral nerve block catheters are needed to assess if extended blockade continues to provide motor-sparing and opioid-sparing benefits.

Analgesic efficacy of single-shot adductor canal block versus adductor canal block combined with intra-articular ropivacaine infusion after total knee arthroplasty

Aims

Single-shot adductor canal block (ACB) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for postoperative analgesia is a common modality. Patients can experience breakthrough pain when the effect of ACB wears off. Local anaesthetic infusion through an intra-articular catheter (IAC) can help manage breakthrough pain after TKA. We hypothesized that combined ACB with ropivacaine infusion through IAC is associated with better pain relief compared to ACB used alone.

Methods

This study was a prospective double-blinded placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of combined ACB+ IAC-ropivacaine infusion (study group, n = 68) versus single-shot ACB+ intra-articular normal saline placebo (control group, n = 66) after primary TKA. The primary outcome was assessment of pain, using the visual analogue scale (VAS) recorded at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included active knee ROM 48 hours after surgery and additional requirement of analgesia for breakthrough pain.

Results

The study group (mean visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score of 5.5 (SD 0.889)) experienced significant reduction in pain 12 hours after surgery compared to the control group (mean VAS 6.62 (SD 1.356); mean difference = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.46 to 0.67; p < 0.001), and pain scores on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD-2 were lower in the study group compared to the control group (mean difference in VAS pain = 1.04 (-1.39 to -0.68, 95% CI, p < 0.001). Fewer patients in the study group (0 vs 3 in the control group) required additional analgesia for breakthrough pain, but this was not statistically significant. The study group had significantly increased active knee flexion (mean flexion 86.4° (SD 7.22°)), compared to the control group (mean 73.86° (SD 7.88°), mean difference = 12.54, 95% CI 9.97 to 15.1; p < 0.014).

Conclusion

Combined ACB+ ropivacaine infusion via IAC is a safe, reproducible analgesic modality after primary TKA, with superior analgesia compared to ACB alone. Further large volume trials are warranted to generate evidence on clinical significance on analgesia after TKA.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1082–1088.

Preoperative pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block for total hip arthroplasty: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that the addition of a preoperative pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block to intra-articular local anesthetic injection would improve analgesia after total hip arthroplasty.

METHOD

In this double-blinded trial, 71 patients scheduled for primary total hip arthroplasty were randomized to receive preoperative PENG block with 20 mL 0.5% ropivacaine (PENG group) or 20 mL saline (placebo group). All the patients received an intra-articular injection of 20 mL 0.5% ropivacaine by surgeon after the completion of the procedure. The primary outcome was the highest pain score reported in the recovery room. The secondary outcomes included quadriceps strength, pain scores, opioid use, and opioid-related side effects up to 48 hours after surgery.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included in the final analysis. The highest visual analog scale in the recovery room showed significant intergroup difference (placebo: 5.2±3.1 vs PENG: 3.3±2.7, p<0.01) but the difference did not persist after discharge from the recovery room. The two groups' postoperative pain scores at rest were similar. A lower intraoperative morphine equivalent dose and lower postoperative vomiting were found in the PENG group. There were no differences in the other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The addition of a preoperative PENG block to intra-articular injections of local anesthetic provides a limited benefit to postoperative analgesia in the recovery room with no discernible benefits thereafter.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04480320.

Efficacy and safety of the pulsed electromagnetic field in osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of the pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy in treating osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched through 13 October 2017.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials compared the efficacy of PEMF therapy with sham control in patients with OA.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Pain, function, adverse effects and characteristics of participants were extracted. RevMan V.5.2 was used to perform statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Twelve trials were included, among which ten trials involved knee OA, two involved cervical OA and one involved hand OA. The PEMF group showed more significant pain alleviation than the sham group in knee OA (standardised mean differences (SMD)=-0.54, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.04, p=0.03) and hand OA (SMD=-2.85, 95% CI -3.65 to -2.04, p<0.00001), but not in cervical OA. Similarly, comparing with the sham-control treatment, significant function improvement was observed in the PEMF group in both knee and hand OA patients (SMD=-0.34, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.14, p=0.0006, and SMD=-1.49, 95% CI -2.12 to -0.86, p<0.00001, respectively), but not in patients with cervical OA. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the exposure duration <=30 min per session exhibited better effects compared with the exposure duration >30 min per session. Three trials reported adverse events, and the combined results showed that there was no significant difference between PEMF and the sham group.

CONCLUSIONS

PEMF could alleviate pain and improve physical function for patients with knee and hand OA, but not for patients with cervical OA. Meanwhile, a short PEMF treatment duration (within 30 min) may achieve more favourable efficacy. However, given the limited number of study available in hand and cervical OA, the implication of this conclusion should be cautious for hand and cervical OA.