Achilles hero or heel? A systematic review of popliteal nerve block for achilles repair

Connor T.A. Brenna MD , Shawn Khan MD MEng , Faraj W. Abdallah MD FRCPC , Richard Brull MD FRCPC
{"title":"Achilles hero or heel? A systematic review of popliteal nerve block for achilles repair","authors":"Connor T.A. Brenna MD ,&nbsp;Shawn Khan MD MEng ,&nbsp;Faraj W. Abdallah MD FRCPC ,&nbsp;Richard Brull MD FRCPC","doi":"10.1016/j.fastrc.2025.100474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Achilles tendon rupture is an exceptionally common injury, particularly among athletes. Popliteal nerve block is often performed for pain relief during surgical Achilles repair; however, the evidence basis demonstrating its analgesic effectiveness is uncertain. Popliteal nerve block faces an especially high burden of proof in this setting, because percutaneous Achilles repair and popliteal nerve block are each independently associated with a relatively high risk of iatrogenic nerve injury, which is potentially catastrophic for athletes competing at any level. Therefore, we undertook a systematic review of the literature to understand the evidence basis for popliteal nerve block compared to systemic multimodal analgesia for Achilles repair surgery. We followed a predefined protocol (CRD42024577995) and adhered to PRISMA reporting guidelines. However, our systematic review of the published literature identified zero randomized trials comparing popliteal nerve block to systemic analgesia for Achilles repair surgery, and only one small retrospective cohort study which failed to demonstrate a significant difference in patient outcomes after popliteal nerve block versus systemic analgesia alone. There is presently no high-quality evidence to support or refute the routine administration of a popliteal nerve block relative to systemic analgesia for Achilles repair surgery. Providers, patients, and payers alike must recognize this major gap in the literature. Future randomized controlled trials are required to validate the analgesic effectiveness and safety profile of popliteal nerve block compared to systemic analgesia for surgical Achilles repair.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73047,"journal":{"name":"Foot & ankle surgery (New York, N.Y.)","volume":"5 1","pages":"Article 100474"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot & ankle surgery (New York, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667396725000096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Achilles tendon rupture is an exceptionally common injury, particularly among athletes. Popliteal nerve block is often performed for pain relief during surgical Achilles repair; however, the evidence basis demonstrating its analgesic effectiveness is uncertain. Popliteal nerve block faces an especially high burden of proof in this setting, because percutaneous Achilles repair and popliteal nerve block are each independently associated with a relatively high risk of iatrogenic nerve injury, which is potentially catastrophic for athletes competing at any level. Therefore, we undertook a systematic review of the literature to understand the evidence basis for popliteal nerve block compared to systemic multimodal analgesia for Achilles repair surgery. We followed a predefined protocol (CRD42024577995) and adhered to PRISMA reporting guidelines. However, our systematic review of the published literature identified zero randomized trials comparing popliteal nerve block to systemic analgesia for Achilles repair surgery, and only one small retrospective cohort study which failed to demonstrate a significant difference in patient outcomes after popliteal nerve block versus systemic analgesia alone. There is presently no high-quality evidence to support or refute the routine administration of a popliteal nerve block relative to systemic analgesia for Achilles repair surgery. Providers, patients, and payers alike must recognize this major gap in the literature. Future randomized controlled trials are required to validate the analgesic effectiveness and safety profile of popliteal nerve block compared to systemic analgesia for surgical Achilles repair.
阿基里斯英雄还是跟腱?腘神经阻滞治疗跟腱修复的系统综述
跟腱断裂是一种非常常见的损伤,特别是在运动员中。在跟腱修复手术中,腘神经阻滞常用于缓解疼痛;然而,其镇痛效果的证据基础尚不确定。在这种情况下,腘神经阻滞面临着特别高的举证责任,因为经皮跟腱修复和腘神经阻滞各自独立地与相对较高的医源性神经损伤风险相关,这对任何水平的运动员来说都是潜在的灾难性的。因此,我们对文献进行了系统回顾,以了解腘神经阻滞与全身多模式镇痛在跟腱修复手术中的证据基础。我们遵循预定义的协议(CRD42024577995)并遵守PRISMA报告指南。然而,我们对已发表文献的系统回顾发现,没有随机试验比较腘神经阻滞与全身镇痛对跟腱修复手术的影响,只有一个小型回顾性队列研究未能证明腘神经阻滞与单独全身镇痛对患者预后的显著差异。目前没有高质量的证据支持或反驳常规给药腘神经阻滞相对于全身镇痛的跟腱修复手术。提供者、患者和付款人都必须认识到文献中的这一重大差距。需要进一步的随机对照试验来验证腘神经阻滞与全身镇痛在跟腱修复手术中的镇痛效果和安全性。
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
Foot & ankle surgery (New York, N.Y.)
Foot & ankle surgery (New York, N.Y.) Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation, Podiatry
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
75 days
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信