Analgesic effect of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block added to the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block in primary total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Minerva anestesiologica Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-04 DOI:10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18141-2
Fabricio A Cardoso, Anneliese Fortuna-Costa, Luis V Garcia
{"title":"Analgesic effect of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block added to the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block in primary total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Fabricio A Cardoso, Anneliese Fortuna-Costa, Luis V Garcia","doi":"10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18141-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adequate hip joint and surgical incision analgesia represent a challenge in the postoperative period of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to evaluate whether the combination of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (LFCN block) and the pericapsular nerve group block (PENG block) influences postoperative analgesia and rescue opioids, in primary THA surgeries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A trial was proposed with 74 patients for THA surgeries under spinal anesthesia, where 37 received PENG block (GPENG) and the other 37, PENG block and LFCN block (GPENG+LFC). The primary outcome was the presence and intensity of pain at rest and on movement, using the Numeric Rating Scale. The secondary main outcome was the total consumption of opioids. The follow-up was 48 h.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significantly fewer patients reported pain in the GPENG+LFC compared to GPENG: at rest, at 4 h (17 [45.95%] vs. 28 [75.68%] respectively, P=0.088), 12 h (4 [10.81%] vs. 17 [45.95%] respectively, P=0.016), and 24 h (4 [10.81%] vs. 13 [35.14%] respectively, P=0.0252); on movement, at 4 h (17 [45.95%] vs. 30 [81.08%] respectively, P=0.0002), 12 h (4 [10.81%] vs. 19 [51.35%] respectively, P=0.0003), and 24 h (5 [13.51%] vs. 14 [37.84%] respectively, P=0.0166). Total opioid consumption was significantly lower in GPENG+LFC compared to GPENG up to 48 hours postoperatively (1200 mg of tramadol and 6 mg of nalbuphine vs. 2400 mg and 21 mg respectively, P=0.0188).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The combination of the LFCN block and the PENG block, compared to the sole PENG block, results in better analgesia at rest and on movement up to 24 h and a reduction in the total consumption of opioids up to 48 h after THA.</p>","PeriodicalId":18522,"journal":{"name":"Minerva anestesiologica","volume":" ","pages":"26-35"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva anestesiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.24.18141-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Adequate hip joint and surgical incision analgesia represent a challenge in the postoperative period of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to evaluate whether the combination of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (LFCN block) and the pericapsular nerve group block (PENG block) influences postoperative analgesia and rescue opioids, in primary THA surgeries.

Methods: A trial was proposed with 74 patients for THA surgeries under spinal anesthesia, where 37 received PENG block (GPENG) and the other 37, PENG block and LFCN block (GPENG+LFC). The primary outcome was the presence and intensity of pain at rest and on movement, using the Numeric Rating Scale. The secondary main outcome was the total consumption of opioids. The follow-up was 48 h.

Results: Significantly fewer patients reported pain in the GPENG+LFC compared to GPENG: at rest, at 4 h (17 [45.95%] vs. 28 [75.68%] respectively, P=0.088), 12 h (4 [10.81%] vs. 17 [45.95%] respectively, P=0.016), and 24 h (4 [10.81%] vs. 13 [35.14%] respectively, P=0.0252); on movement, at 4 h (17 [45.95%] vs. 30 [81.08%] respectively, P=0.0002), 12 h (4 [10.81%] vs. 19 [51.35%] respectively, P=0.0003), and 24 h (5 [13.51%] vs. 14 [37.84%] respectively, P=0.0166). Total opioid consumption was significantly lower in GPENG+LFC compared to GPENG up to 48 hours postoperatively (1200 mg of tramadol and 6 mg of nalbuphine vs. 2400 mg and 21 mg respectively, P=0.0188).

Conclusions: The combination of the LFCN block and the PENG block, compared to the sole PENG block, results in better analgesia at rest and on movement up to 24 h and a reduction in the total consumption of opioids up to 48 h after THA.

原发性全髋关节置换术中股外侧皮神经阻滞对囊包神经组(PENG)阻滞的镇痛效果:一项随机临床试验。
背景:充分的髋关节和手术切口镇痛是原发性全髋关节置换术(THA)术后的一个挑战。本研究旨在评估在原发性THA手术中,股外侧皮神经阻滞(LFCN阻滞)和囊包神经群阻滞(PENG阻滞)联合使用是否影响术后镇痛和阿片类药物的抢救。方法:对74例脊柱麻醉下THA手术患者进行试验,其中37例接受PENG阻滞(GPENG),另外37例接受PENG阻滞和LFCN阻滞(GPENG+LFC)。主要结果是在休息和运动时疼痛的存在和强度,使用数值评定量表。次要主要结局是阿片类药物的总消费量。结果:与GPENG相比,GPENG+LFC的患者报告疼痛明显减少:休息时,4小时(分别为17[45.95%]比28 [75.68%],P=0.088), 12小时(分别为4[10.81%]比17 [45.95%],P=0.016), 24小时(分别为4[10.81%]比13 [35.14%],P=0.0252);在运动方面,4 h(17[45.95%]比30 [81.08%],P=0.0002), 12 h(4[10.81%]比19 [51.35%],P=0.0003), 24 h(5[13.51%]比14 [37.84%],P=0.0166)。术后48小时内,GPENG+LFC的阿片类药物总消耗量明显低于GPENG(曲马多1200 mg和纳布啡6 mg分别比2400 mg和21 mg, P=0.0188)。结论:与单独的PENG阻滞相比,LFCN阻滞和PENG阻滞联合使用可在静止和运动24小时内产生更好的镇痛效果,并且在THA后48小时内阿片类药物的总消耗量减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Minerva anestesiologica
Minerva anestesiologica 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
367
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Minerva Anestesiologica is the journal of the Italian National Society of Anaesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care. Minerva Anestesiologica publishes scientific papers on Anesthesiology, Intensive care, Analgesia, Perioperative Medicine and related fields. Manuscripts are expected to comply with the instructions to authors which conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Editors by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信