Comparing the pericapsular nerve group block and fascia iliaca block for acute pain management in patients with hip fracture: a randomised clinical trial.

IF 6.9 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2025-07-29 DOI:10.1111/anae.16695
Santi Di Pietro,Riccardo Maffeis,Eugenio Jannelli,Benedetta Mascia,Flavia Resta,Annalisa De Silvestri,Valeria Musella,Clarissa Elisabeth Centurioni,Elena Regeni,Federico Alberto Grassi,Alessandro Locatelli,Stefano Perlini,
{"title":"Comparing the pericapsular nerve group block and fascia iliaca block for acute pain management in patients with hip fracture: a randomised clinical trial.","authors":"Santi Di Pietro,Riccardo Maffeis,Eugenio Jannelli,Benedetta Mascia,Flavia Resta,Annalisa De Silvestri,Valeria Musella,Clarissa Elisabeth Centurioni,Elena Regeni,Federico Alberto Grassi,Alessandro Locatelli,Stefano Perlini, ","doi":"10.1111/anae.16695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\r\nThe fascia iliaca block (FIB) is currently recommended as a component of multimodal acute pain management for patients with hip fracture. The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a newer technique that may provide superior analgesia. We therefore designed this study in an academic emergency department to compare the acute analgesic effect of these two approaches in patients with a hip fracture.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nAdult patients with an acute hip fracture who reported at least moderate pain were eligible for inclusion. Patients were allocated randomly to receive either a PENG block with 20 ml 0.375% levobupivacaine plus 4 mg dexamethasone or infra-inguinal FIB with 30 ml 0.25% levobupivacaine plus 4 mg dexamethasone. Primary outcome was the percentage of summed pain intensity difference (%SPID) calculated from visual analogue pain scores measured during the first hour post-block. Secondary outcomes included: number of patients reaching 33% and 50% SPID; dose of rescue opioid administered in morphine milligram equivalents; and incidence of adverse events.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nIn total, 92 patients were screened for eligibility and 64 were enrolled (32 in each group). Patients allocated to the PENG block group showed a greater %SPID when compared with those allocated to the FIB group (62.7% (95%CI 52.9-72.4%) vs. 38.0% (95%CI 30.7-45.4%), respectively; difference: -24.7% (95%CI -36.6 to -12.7%), p < 0.001). In the PENG group, 24/32 patients achieved 50% SPID compared with 7/32 in the FIB group (p < 0.001). Similarly, in the PENG group, 28/32 patients achieved 33% SPID compared with 19/32 in the FIB group (p = 0.022). There was no significant difference in the rescue opioid dose administered or in the incidence of adverse events.\r\n\r\nDISCUSSION\r\nThe PENG block provides superior analgesia for the first hour after intervention when compared with the infra-inguinal FIB and represents a promising modality for acute pain management in emergency departments.","PeriodicalId":7742,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.16695","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The fascia iliaca block (FIB) is currently recommended as a component of multimodal acute pain management for patients with hip fracture. The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a newer technique that may provide superior analgesia. We therefore designed this study in an academic emergency department to compare the acute analgesic effect of these two approaches in patients with a hip fracture. METHODS Adult patients with an acute hip fracture who reported at least moderate pain were eligible for inclusion. Patients were allocated randomly to receive either a PENG block with 20 ml 0.375% levobupivacaine plus 4 mg dexamethasone or infra-inguinal FIB with 30 ml 0.25% levobupivacaine plus 4 mg dexamethasone. Primary outcome was the percentage of summed pain intensity difference (%SPID) calculated from visual analogue pain scores measured during the first hour post-block. Secondary outcomes included: number of patients reaching 33% and 50% SPID; dose of rescue opioid administered in morphine milligram equivalents; and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS In total, 92 patients were screened for eligibility and 64 were enrolled (32 in each group). Patients allocated to the PENG block group showed a greater %SPID when compared with those allocated to the FIB group (62.7% (95%CI 52.9-72.4%) vs. 38.0% (95%CI 30.7-45.4%), respectively; difference: -24.7% (95%CI -36.6 to -12.7%), p < 0.001). In the PENG group, 24/32 patients achieved 50% SPID compared with 7/32 in the FIB group (p < 0.001). Similarly, in the PENG group, 28/32 patients achieved 33% SPID compared with 19/32 in the FIB group (p = 0.022). There was no significant difference in the rescue opioid dose administered or in the incidence of adverse events. DISCUSSION The PENG block provides superior analgesia for the first hour after intervention when compared with the infra-inguinal FIB and represents a promising modality for acute pain management in emergency departments.
比较囊周神经阻滞和髂筋膜阻滞对髋部骨折患者急性疼痛的治疗:一项随机临床试验。
髂筋膜阻滞(FIB)目前被推荐作为髋部骨折患者多模式急性疼痛治疗的一个组成部分。囊周神经阻滞是一种较新的技术,可以提供更好的镇痛效果。因此,我们在一个学术急诊科设计了这项研究,比较这两种入路对髋部骨折患者的急性镇痛效果。方法:报告至少中度疼痛的急性髋部骨折成年患者符合纳入条件。患者被随机分配接受20 ml 0.375%左布比卡因加4mg地塞米松的PENG阻滞或30 ml 0.25%左布比卡因加4mg地塞米松的腹股沟下FIB。主要结局是在阻滞后第一个小时内测量的视觉模拟疼痛评分计算的总疼痛强度差的百分比(%SPID)。次要结局包括:达到33%和50% SPID的患者人数;救援阿片类药物剂量吗啡毫克当量;以及不良事件的发生率。结果共筛选92例患者,入组64例(每组32例)。与FIB组相比,分配到PENG阻断组的患者显示出更高的%SPID(分别为62.7% (95%CI 52.9-72.4%)和38.0% (95%CI 30.7-45.4%);区别:-24.7% (95% ci -36.6 - -12.7%), p < 0.001)。在PENG组中,24/32的患者达到了50%的SPID,而FIB组为7/32 (p < 0.001)。同样,在PENG组中,28/32的患者达到33%的SPID,而FIB组为19/32 (p = 0.022)。在给予的阿片类药物剂量或不良事件发生率方面没有显着差异。与腹股沟下FIB相比,彭阻滞在干预后的第一个小时提供了更好的镇痛效果,代表了急诊科急性疼痛治疗的一种有希望的模式。
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
Anaesthesia
Anaesthesia 医学-麻醉学
CiteScore
21.20
自引率
9.30%
发文量
300
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the Association of Anaesthetists is Anaesthesia. It is a comprehensive international publication that covers a wide range of topics. The journal focuses on general and regional anaesthesia, as well as intensive care and pain therapy. It includes original articles that have undergone peer review, covering all aspects of these fields, including research on equipment.
×
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