Effects of ultrasound-guided adductor canal block at different volumes on postoperative analgesia management in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective clinical study.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Mursel Ekinci, Ahmet Kaciroglu, Mustafa Dikici, Merih Yildiz Eglen, Fatih Bayrak, İrem Aydogmus, Erkan Cem Çelik, Bahadir Ciftci
{"title":"Effects of ultrasound-guided adductor canal block at different volumes on postoperative analgesia management in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective clinical study.","authors":"Mursel Ekinci, Ahmet Kaciroglu, Mustafa Dikici, Merih Yildiz Eglen, Fatih Bayrak, İrem Aydogmus, Erkan Cem Çelik, Bahadir Ciftci","doi":"10.1186/s12871-025-03383-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many different analgesia techniques are performed in knee arthroplasty. Adductor canal block is one of the analgesia techniques following knee arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of adductor canal block performed at different volumes (20 ml, 30 ml, 40 ml) for postoperative analgesia management in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center prospective randomized controlled study included 90 patients, aged between 18 and 65, with ASA classification I-II-III, who were scheduled for total knee arthroplasty surgery under spinal anesthesia. Patients were randomized into three groups: Group 20, group 30 and group 40. Postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and motor block were evaluated. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the primary and secondary outcomes between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The difference in static NRS scores at all times except the 8th hour and in dynamic NRS scores at all times was found to be statistically significant. Group 40 had significantly lower opioid consumption and additional analgesic requirements compared to Group 20, but no statistically significant difference was found compared to Group 30. Group 40 had a statistically significantly higher rate of motor block in the first 8 h compared to Groups 20 and 30. No statistically significant difference was found between Groups 20 and 30 in terms of motor block at all times.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings of our study showed that the optimal volume of adductor canal block to provide effective analgesia and preserve muscle strength functions in the postoperative period after total knee arthroplasty was 30 ml.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration number: </strong>NCT06084403.</p>","PeriodicalId":9190,"journal":{"name":"BMC Anesthesiology","volume":"25 1","pages":"510"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12536519/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-025-03383-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many different analgesia techniques are performed in knee arthroplasty. Adductor canal block is one of the analgesia techniques following knee arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of adductor canal block performed at different volumes (20 ml, 30 ml, 40 ml) for postoperative analgesia management in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

Methods: This single-center prospective randomized controlled study included 90 patients, aged between 18 and 65, with ASA classification I-II-III, who were scheduled for total knee arthroplasty surgery under spinal anesthesia. Patients were randomized into three groups: Group 20, group 30 and group 40. Postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and motor block were evaluated. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the primary and secondary outcomes between groups.

Results: The difference in static NRS scores at all times except the 8th hour and in dynamic NRS scores at all times was found to be statistically significant. Group 40 had significantly lower opioid consumption and additional analgesic requirements compared to Group 20, but no statistically significant difference was found compared to Group 30. Group 40 had a statistically significantly higher rate of motor block in the first 8 h compared to Groups 20 and 30. No statistically significant difference was found between Groups 20 and 30 in terms of motor block at all times.

Conclusions: The findings of our study showed that the optimal volume of adductor canal block to provide effective analgesia and preserve muscle strength functions in the postoperative period after total knee arthroplasty was 30 ml.

Clinical trial registration number: NCT06084403.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

超声引导下不同体积内收管阻滞对全膝关节置换术患者术后镇痛管理的影响:一项前瞻性临床研究。
背景:在膝关节置换术中应用了许多不同的镇痛技术。内收管阻滞是膝关节置换术后的镇痛技术之一。本研究的目的是评估不同容积(20 ml、30 ml、40 ml)内收管阻滞对全膝关节置换术患者术后镇痛管理的有效性。方法:本研究为单中心前瞻性随机对照研究,纳入90例患者,年龄18 ~ 65岁,ASA分级I-II-III,计划在脊髓麻醉下行全膝关节置换术。患者随机分为20组、30组和40组。评估术后疼痛、阿片类药物消耗和运动阻滞。对两组间主要和次要结局进行统计学分析比较。结果:除第8小时外,各时段的静态NRS评分与各时段的动态NRS评分差异均有统计学意义。与20组相比,40组的阿片类药物消耗和额外的镇痛需求显著降低,但与30组相比无统计学差异。与20和30组相比,40组在前8 h的运动阻滞率有统计学意义。20组和30组在任何时候的运动阻滞均无统计学差异。结论:本研究结果表明,全膝关节置换术后有效镇痛和保持肌力功能的内收管阻滞的最佳容积为30 ml。临床试验注册号:NCT06084403。
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 Anesthesiology
BMC Anesthesiology ANESTHESIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
349
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Anesthesiology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of anesthesiology, critical care, perioperative care and pain management, including clinical and experimental research into anesthetic mechanisms, administration and efficacy, technology and monitoring, and associated economic issues.
×
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