Background: This prospective double-blinded, randomized controlled trial compared adductor canal block (ACB) with femoral nerve block (FNB) in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. The authors hypothesized that ACB, compared with FNB, would exhibit less quadriceps weakness and demonstrate noninferior pain score and opioid consumption at 6 to 8 h postanesthesia. Methods: Patients received an ACB or FNB as a component of a multimodal analgesic. Quadriceps strength, pain score, and opioid consumption were assessed on both legs preoperatively and at 6 to 8, 24, and 48 h postanesthesia administration. In a joint hypothesis test, noninferiority was first evaluated on the primary outcomes of strength, pain score, and opioid consumption at 6 to 8 h; superiority on each outcome at 6 to 8 h was then assessed only if noninferiority was established. Results: Forty-six patients received ACB; 47 patients received FNB. At 6 to 8 h postanesthesia, ACB patients had significantly higher median dynamometer readings versus FNB patients (median [interquartile range], 6.1 kgf [3.5, 10.9] (ACB) vs. 0 kgf [0.0, 3.9] (FNB); P < 0.0001), but was not inferior to FNB with regard to Numeric Rating Scale pain scores (1.0 [0.0, 3.5] ACB vs. 0.0 [0.0, 1.0] FNB; P = 0.019), or to opioid consumption (32.2 [22.4, 47.5] ACB vs. 26.6 [19.6, 49.0]; P = 0.0115). At 24 and 48 h postanesthesia, there was no significant statistical difference in dynamometer results, pain scores, or opioid use between the two groups. Conclusion: At 6 to 8 h postanesthesia, the ACB, compared with the FNB, exhibited early relative sparing of quadriceps strength and was not inferior in both providing analgesia or opioid intake.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols produce significant clinical and economic benefits in a range of surgical subspecialties. There is a long tradition of applying clinical pathways to the perioperative care of joint arthroplasty patients. Enhanced recovery after surgery represents the next step in the evolution of standardized care. To date, reports of full ERAS pathways for hip or knee arthroplasty are lacking. In this narrative review, we present the evidence base that can be usefully applied to constructing ERAS pathways for hip or knee arthroplasty. The history and rationale for applying ERAS to joint arthroplasty are explained. Evidence demonstrates improved outcomes after joint arthroplasty when a standardized approach to care is implemented. The efficacy of individual ERAS components in hip or knee replacement is considered, including preoperative education, intraoperative anaesthetic techniques, postoperative analgesia, and early mobilization after joint arthroplasty. Interventions lacking high-quality evidence are identified, together with recommendations for future research. Based on currently available evidence, we present a model ERAS pathway that can be applied to perioperative care of patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.

Ultrasound-guided interscalene and supraclavicular blocks are effective and safe for shoulder arthroscopy. Temporary and permanent PONS is uncommon.

Most outpatient shoulder surgery patients who underwent certain operations were prescribed more opioid analgesics than they consumed. Patient education regarding the disposal of opioids was lacking.

Background Duloxetine is effective for chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain, but there are insufficient data to recommend the use of antidepressants for postoperative pain. The authors hypothesized that administration of duloxetine for 15 days would reduce pain with ambulation at 2 weeks after total knee arthroplasty. Methods In this triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, patients received either duloxetine or placebo for 15 days, starting from the day of surgery. Patients also received a comprehensive multimodal analgesic regimen including neuraxial anesthesia, epidural analgesia, an adductor canal block, meloxicam, and oxycodone/acetaminophen as needed. The primary outcome was the pain score (0 to 10 numeric rating scale) with ambulation on postoperative day 14. Results One hundred six patients were randomized and analyzed. On day 14, duloxetine had no effect on pain with ambulation; mean pain was 3.8 (SD, 2.3) for placebo versus 3.5 (SD, 2.1) for duloxetine (difference in means [95% CI], 0.4 [−0.5 to 1.2]; P = 0.386). Symptoms potentially attributable to duloxetine discontinuation at study drug completion (nausea, anxiety) occurred among nine patients (duloxetine) and five patients (placebo); this was not statistically significant (P = 0.247). Statistically significant secondary outcomes included opioid consumption (difference in mean milligram oral morphine equivalents [95% CI], 8.7 [3.3 to 14.1], P = 0.002 by generalized estimating equation) over the postoperative period and nausea on day 1 (P = 0.040). There was no difference in other side effects or in anxiety and depression scores. Conclusions When included as a part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for knee arthroplasty, duloxetine does not reduce subacute pain with ambulation.

BACKGROUND: Periarticular injections (PAIs) are becoming a staple component of multimodal joint pathways. Motor-sparing peripheral nerve blocks, such as the infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee (IPACK) and the adductor canal block (ACB), may augment PAI in multimodal analgesic pathways for knee arthroplasty, but supporting literature remains rare. We hypothesized that the addition of ACB and IPACK to PAI would lower pain on ambulation on postoperative day (POD) 1 compared to PAI alone. METHODS: This triple-blinded randomized controlled trial included 86 patients undergoing unilateral total knee arthroplasty. Patients either received (1) a PAI (control group, n = 43) or (2) an IPACK with an ACB and modified PAI (intervention group, n = 43). The primary outcome was pain on ambulation on POD 1. Secondary outcomes included numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores, patient satisfaction, and opioid consumption. RESULTS: The intervention group reported significantly lower NRS pain scores on ambulation than the control group on POD 1 (difference in means [95% confidence interval], −3.3 [−4.0 to −2.7]; P < .001). In addition, NRS pain scores on ambulation on POD 0 (−3.5 [−4.3 to −2.7]; P < .001) and POD 2 (−1.0 [−1.9 to −0.1]; P = .033) were significantly lower. Patients in the intervention group were more satisfied, had less opioid consumption (P = .005, postanesthesia care unit, P = .028, POD 0), less intravenous opioids (P < .001), and reduced need for intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of IPACK and ACB to PAI significantly improves analgesia and reduces opioid consumption after total knee arthroplasty compared to PAI alone. This study strongly supports IPACK and ACB use within a multimodal analgesic pathway.

SummaryIt is proposed that ultrasound guidance decreases the risk of intraneural injection and associated postoperative neurological complications. However, the incidence of unintentional intraneural injection with ultrasound is unknown. Two hundred and fifty-seven patients were enrolled in a prospective, single-blind observational study. All patients underwent a pre-operative neurological examination before ambulatory shoulder arthroscopy with sedation and ultrasound-guided interscalene or supraclavicular block. Patients were followed up at 1 week and at 4-6 weeks postoperatively. Two blinded anaesthesiologists viewed the same video of the ultrasound image during the block offline to determine intraneural trespass. Intraneural injection occurred in 42 patients (17%; 95% CI 12-22%). No patient suffered from postoperative neurological complications (0%; 95% CI 0-1.6%) at follow-up.

LPB resulted in statistically significant reductions in PACU resting pain after hip arthroscopy, but the absence of improvement in most secondary outcomes suggests that assessment of risks and benefits of LPB should be individualized.