股骨三角联合iPACK阻滞与单独股骨三角阻滞用于前交叉韧带重建的比较:一项关于术后疼痛和膝关节功能的随机对照临床试验。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Fabrice Ferré, Lise Boussaguet, Nicolas Vari, Fabien Pillard, Laetitia Bosch, Anne Ferrier, Cyndie Ba, Bernard Tissot, Rémi Menut, Matt Kurrek, François Labaste, Etienne Cavaignac, Vincent Minville
{"title":"股骨三角联合iPACK阻滞与单独股骨三角阻滞用于前交叉韧带重建的比较:一项关于术后疼痛和膝关节功能的随机对照临床试验。","authors":"Fabrice Ferré, Lise Boussaguet, Nicolas Vari, Fabien Pillard, Laetitia Bosch, Anne Ferrier, Cyndie Ba, Bernard Tissot, Rémi Menut, Matt Kurrek, François Labaste, Etienne Cavaignac, Vincent Minville","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-106108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can cause severe postoperative pain. However, consensus regarding the most effective regional analgesia is lacking. We hypothesized that, compared with femoral triangle block (FTB) and local infiltration analgesia, adding an iPACK block would decrease postoperative morphine consumption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients scheduled for ACLR under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to the FTB (n=45) or the FTB+iPACK group (n=45). The primary outcome was the cumulative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption during the first two postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were maximum pain scores, opioid adverse effects, and knee functional scores (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm) 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with FTB, FTB+iPACK resulted in similar OME consumption (median (IQR)=50 (14-103) vs 60 (32-89) mg, respectively; median of the difference (95% CI): 5 (-14, 28) mg, p=0.49). No significant intergroup differences were found in terms of pain scores, opioid-related side effects, or functional knee recovery. Pain and symptoms subscales of KOOS and IKDC at 9 months were higher for patients with an OME consumption <50 mg within the first two postoperative days, but these statistical differences did not reach the minimal clinically important difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>iPACK block has no additional analgesic benefits for primary ACLR in the setting of a multimodal analgesia regimen including FTB and local infiltration analgesia.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT05136352.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of femoral triangle plus iPACK blocks with femoral triangle block alone for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled clinical trial on postoperative pain and knee function.\",\"authors\":\"Fabrice Ferré, Lise Boussaguet, Nicolas Vari, Fabien Pillard, Laetitia Bosch, Anne Ferrier, Cyndie Ba, Bernard Tissot, Rémi Menut, Matt Kurrek, François Labaste, Etienne Cavaignac, Vincent Minville\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rapm-2024-106108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can cause severe postoperative pain. However, consensus regarding the most effective regional analgesia is lacking. We hypothesized that, compared with femoral triangle block (FTB) and local infiltration analgesia, adding an iPACK block would decrease postoperative morphine consumption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients scheduled for ACLR under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to the FTB (n=45) or the FTB+iPACK group (n=45). The primary outcome was the cumulative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption during the first two postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were maximum pain scores, opioid adverse effects, and knee functional scores (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm) 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with FTB, FTB+iPACK resulted in similar OME consumption (median (IQR)=50 (14-103) vs 60 (32-89) mg, respectively; median of the difference (95% CI): 5 (-14, 28) mg, p=0.49). No significant intergroup differences were found in terms of pain scores, opioid-related side effects, or functional knee recovery. Pain and symptoms subscales of KOOS and IKDC at 9 months were higher for patients with an OME consumption <50 mg within the first two postoperative days, but these statistical differences did not reach the minimal clinically important difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>iPACK block has no additional analgesic benefits for primary ACLR in the setting of a multimodal analgesia regimen including FTB and local infiltration analgesia.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT05136352.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-106108\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-106108","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

背景:前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)可引起严重的术后疼痛。然而,关于最有效的局部镇痛缺乏共识。我们假设,与股骨三角阻滞(FTB)和局部浸润镇痛相比,添加iPACK阻滞会减少术后吗啡的消耗。方法:将全麻下计划行ACLR的患者随机分为FTB组(n=45)和FTB+iPACK组(n=45)。主要终点是术后前两天的累积口服吗啡当量(OME)消耗。次要结局是术后3、6和9个月的最大疼痛评分、阿片类药物不良反应和膝关节功能评分(膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局(oos)、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)和Lysholm)。结果:与FTB相比,FTB+iPACK导致相似的OME消耗(中位数(IQR)分别=50(14-103)和60 (32-89)mg;差异中位数(95% CI): 5 (- 14,28) mg, p=0.49)。在疼痛评分、阿片类药物相关副作用或膝关节功能恢复方面,组间无显著差异。结论:在包括FTB和局部浸润镇痛在内的多模式镇痛方案下,iPACK阻滞对原发性ACLR没有额外的镇痛益处。试验注册号:NCT05136352。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of femoral triangle plus iPACK blocks with femoral triangle block alone for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled clinical trial on postoperative pain and knee function.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can cause severe postoperative pain. However, consensus regarding the most effective regional analgesia is lacking. We hypothesized that, compared with femoral triangle block (FTB) and local infiltration analgesia, adding an iPACK block would decrease postoperative morphine consumption.

Methods: Patients scheduled for ACLR under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to the FTB (n=45) or the FTB+iPACK group (n=45). The primary outcome was the cumulative oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption during the first two postoperative days. Secondary outcomes were maximum pain scores, opioid adverse effects, and knee functional scores (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm) 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery.

Results: Compared with FTB, FTB+iPACK resulted in similar OME consumption (median (IQR)=50 (14-103) vs 60 (32-89) mg, respectively; median of the difference (95% CI): 5 (-14, 28) mg, p=0.49). No significant intergroup differences were found in terms of pain scores, opioid-related side effects, or functional knee recovery. Pain and symptoms subscales of KOOS and IKDC at 9 months were higher for patients with an OME consumption <50 mg within the first two postoperative days, but these statistical differences did not reach the minimal clinically important difference.

Conclusions: iPACK block has no additional analgesic benefits for primary ACLR in the setting of a multimodal analgesia regimen including FTB and local infiltration analgesia.

Trial registration number: NCT05136352.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
×
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