Effects of pericapsular nerve group block and fascia Iliaca compartment block on postoperative analgesia and early rehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Fenglei Li, Tao Liao, Jianhua Huang, Ronghua Xu
{"title":"Effects of pericapsular nerve group block and fascia Iliaca compartment block on postoperative analgesia and early rehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.","authors":"Fenglei Li, Tao Liao, Jianhua Huang, Ronghua Xu","doi":"10.1186/s12893-025-03137-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common procedure in elderly patients that requires effective postoperative analgesia to enhance recovery and minimize complications. This study compares the effects of pericapsular nerve group block (PENG) and fascia iliaca compartment Block (FICB) on postoperative analgesia and early rehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing THA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023 and included 216 elderly patients scheduled for THA. Patients were divided into two groups: PENG (n = 108) and FICB (n = 108). The efficacy and safety of the nerve blocks were assessed by procedure and onset times, intraoperative anesthetic use, postoperative pain (VAS scores), analgesic consumption, motor function recovery (Modified Bromage Scores), and adverse reactions. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The PENG group required significantly lower doses of propofol (327.3 ± 90.5 mg vs. 353.4 ± 85.7 mg, p = 0.03) and remifentanil (1.1 ± 0.4 mg vs. 1.4 ± 0.5 mg, p < 0.001) than the FICB group. Postoperative VAS pain scores were lower in the PENG group at 8 h during activity (1.1 vs. 2.1, P < 0.05). The PENG group also showed fewer effective PCA presses (3.5 ± 1.4 vs. 4.3 ± 1.5, p < 0.001) and lower sufentanil consumption (62.3 ± 13.3 µg vs. 72.1 ± 13.6 µg, p < 0.001). The PENG group had a significantly lower incidence of quadriceps weakness (7% vs. 24%, p < 0.001) and faster recovery of motor function at all time points.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both PENG and FICB provided effective perioperative analgesia in elderly patients undergoing THA. However, PENG may offer advantages in reducing postoperative pain during activity and in preserving lower limb motor function, potentially facilitating earlier rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":49229,"journal":{"name":"BMC Surgery","volume":"25 1","pages":"381"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12369102/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-03137-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common procedure in elderly patients that requires effective postoperative analgesia to enhance recovery and minimize complications. This study compares the effects of pericapsular nerve group block (PENG) and fascia iliaca compartment Block (FICB) on postoperative analgesia and early rehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing THA.

Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted from January 2021 to December 2023 and included 216 elderly patients scheduled for THA. Patients were divided into two groups: PENG (n = 108) and FICB (n = 108). The efficacy and safety of the nerve blocks were assessed by procedure and onset times, intraoperative anesthetic use, postoperative pain (VAS scores), analgesic consumption, motor function recovery (Modified Bromage Scores), and adverse reactions. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.

Results: The PENG group required significantly lower doses of propofol (327.3 ± 90.5 mg vs. 353.4 ± 85.7 mg, p = 0.03) and remifentanil (1.1 ± 0.4 mg vs. 1.4 ± 0.5 mg, p < 0.001) than the FICB group. Postoperative VAS pain scores were lower in the PENG group at 8 h during activity (1.1 vs. 2.1, P < 0.05). The PENG group also showed fewer effective PCA presses (3.5 ± 1.4 vs. 4.3 ± 1.5, p < 0.001) and lower sufentanil consumption (62.3 ± 13.3 µg vs. 72.1 ± 13.6 µg, p < 0.001). The PENG group had a significantly lower incidence of quadriceps weakness (7% vs. 24%, p < 0.001) and faster recovery of motor function at all time points.

Conclusions: Both PENG and FICB provided effective perioperative analgesia in elderly patients undergoing THA. However, PENG may offer advantages in reducing postoperative pain during activity and in preserving lower limb motor function, potentially facilitating earlier rehabilitation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

囊周神经群阻滞和髂筋膜间室阻滞对老年全髋关节置换术患者术后镇痛及早期康复的影响。
背景:全髋关节置换术(THA)是老年患者的一种常见手术,需要有效的术后镇痛来增强恢复并减少并发症。本研究比较了囊周神经群阻滞(PENG)和髂筋膜间室阻滞(FICB)对老年THA术后镇痛和早期康复的影响。方法:本回顾性观察研究于2021年1月至2023年12月进行,纳入216例计划行THA的老年患者。患者分为两组:PENG组(n = 108)和FICB组(n = 108)。神经阻滞的有效性和安全性通过手术和发作时间、术中麻醉剂的使用、术后疼痛(VAS评分)、镇痛药的消耗、运动功能恢复(改良Bromage评分)和不良反应来评估。采用SPSS软件进行统计分析。结果:彭组丙泊酚(327.3±90.5 mg vs 353.4±85.7 mg, p = 0.03)和瑞芬太尼(1.1±0.4 mg vs 1.4±0.5 mg, p = 0.03)对老年THA患者围术期镇痛均有显著降低。然而,PENG可能在减少术后活动疼痛和保持下肢运动功能方面具有优势,可能有助于早期康复。
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
BMC Surgery
BMC Surgery SURGERY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
391
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: BMC Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on surgical research, training, and practice.
×
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