Pain After Unilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Examining the Analgesic Effectiveness of a Combined Adductor Canal Peripheral Nerve Block with Periarticular Infiltration Versus Adductor Canal Nerve Block Alone Versus Periarticular Infiltration Alone
Abstract:Participants who received AC + PI reported significantly less pain on walking on PODs 1 and 2 compared with those who received AC only or PI only.
“…By screening the titles and reading the abstracts and the full texts, 3 studies were excluded without meeting the inclusion criteria. Ultimately, we included 3 studies [18,21,26] with 337 patients for data extraction and meta-analysis (Fig. 1), with sample sizes ranging from 40 to 198.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The publication dates of eligible studies ranged from 2013 to 2016. There were 2 RCTs [18,26] and 1 nRCT [21] in the included studies. All the researchers conducted were for unilateral primary TKA.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All trials used spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia was performed using hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 to 15 mg administered via the L3-4 or L2-3 vertebral interspaces in 1 trial; [18] another trial [26] used 2 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine with 0.1 mg preservative-free morphine for spinal anesthesia; all patients received a standard spinal anesthetic with 15 mg of bupivacaine and 100 μg of morphine injected at the L2-3 or L3-4 levels in one trial. [21] All studies involved the use of intraoperative PI.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The variation of the contents and methods used in the PI was noted. For instance, in the study by Sawhney et al, [26] 20 mL of PI solution was injected into the posterior capsule and the medial and lateral ligaments just before implantation; after insertion of the implants, another 20 mL was infiltrated into the capsule and retinacular tissues; the remaining solution was used to infiltrate the muscle and subcutaneous tissues. In the study by Andersen et al [18] half of the PI solution was injected in the posterior joint capsule and along the meniscectomy line, and the other half was injected in the anterior joint capsule along the incision line before closure.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total scores of the 2 RCTs [18,26] showed the quality of the 2 trials to be high (mJS scores = 6 and 7). According to the NOQAS, the remaining 1 study [21] scored 7 points (which denoted high quality) (Table 1).…”
Background:Both adductor canal block (ACB) and periarticular infiltration (PI) have been shown to reduce pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) without the motor blockade. However, the efficacy and safety of combined ACB with PI (ACB + PI) as compared to PI alone for analgesia after TKA remains controversial. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to compare the effects of ACB + PI with PI alone on pain controll after TKA.Methods:PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies comparing ACB + PI with PI alone for TKA patients. The primary outcomes included pain score with rest or activity and morphine consumption. Secondary outcomes were distance walked, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Relevant data were analyzed using RevMan v5.3.Results:Three studies involving 337 patients were included. Combined ACB with PI was associated with longer distances walked than PI alone (MD = 7.27, 95% CI: 0.43–14.12, P = 0.04) on postoperative day 1. The outcomes of pain, morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were not statistically different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).Conclusion:Our meta-analysis suggests that combined ACB with PI may achieve earlier ambulation for patients after TKA without a reduction in analgesia when compared to PI alone in the early postoperative period. There were no significant differences in morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications between the 2 groups. However, owing to the variation of included studies, no firm conclusions can be drawn.
“…By screening the titles and reading the abstracts and the full texts, 3 studies were excluded without meeting the inclusion criteria. Ultimately, we included 3 studies [18,21,26] with 337 patients for data extraction and meta-analysis (Fig. 1), with sample sizes ranging from 40 to 198.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The publication dates of eligible studies ranged from 2013 to 2016. There were 2 RCTs [18,26] and 1 nRCT [21] in the included studies. All the researchers conducted were for unilateral primary TKA.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All trials used spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia was performed using hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 to 15 mg administered via the L3-4 or L2-3 vertebral interspaces in 1 trial; [18] another trial [26] used 2 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine with 0.1 mg preservative-free morphine for spinal anesthesia; all patients received a standard spinal anesthetic with 15 mg of bupivacaine and 100 μg of morphine injected at the L2-3 or L3-4 levels in one trial. [21] All studies involved the use of intraoperative PI.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The variation of the contents and methods used in the PI was noted. For instance, in the study by Sawhney et al, [26] 20 mL of PI solution was injected into the posterior capsule and the medial and lateral ligaments just before implantation; after insertion of the implants, another 20 mL was infiltrated into the capsule and retinacular tissues; the remaining solution was used to infiltrate the muscle and subcutaneous tissues. In the study by Andersen et al [18] half of the PI solution was injected in the posterior joint capsule and along the meniscectomy line, and the other half was injected in the anterior joint capsule along the incision line before closure.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total scores of the 2 RCTs [18,26] showed the quality of the 2 trials to be high (mJS scores = 6 and 7). According to the NOQAS, the remaining 1 study [21] scored 7 points (which denoted high quality) (Table 1).…”
Background:Both adductor canal block (ACB) and periarticular infiltration (PI) have been shown to reduce pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) without the motor blockade. However, the efficacy and safety of combined ACB with PI (ACB + PI) as compared to PI alone for analgesia after TKA remains controversial. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to compare the effects of ACB + PI with PI alone on pain controll after TKA.Methods:PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies comparing ACB + PI with PI alone for TKA patients. The primary outcomes included pain score with rest or activity and morphine consumption. Secondary outcomes were distance walked, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Relevant data were analyzed using RevMan v5.3.Results:Three studies involving 337 patients were included. Combined ACB with PI was associated with longer distances walked than PI alone (MD = 7.27, 95% CI: 0.43–14.12, P = 0.04) on postoperative day 1. The outcomes of pain, morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were not statistically different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).Conclusion:Our meta-analysis suggests that combined ACB with PI may achieve earlier ambulation for patients after TKA without a reduction in analgesia when compared to PI alone in the early postoperative period. There were no significant differences in morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications between the 2 groups. However, owing to the variation of included studies, no firm conclusions can be drawn.
PurposeTo compare the outcomes and complications of two perioperative protocols for the management of patients who underwent medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA): 24 h (1‐day surgery [OS]) versus 72 h (enhanced recovery after surgery [ERAS]) of the length of hospital stay (LOS). In our hypothesis, the reduction of the LOS from 3 to 1 day did not influence the outcomes and complications.MethodsA total of 42 patients (21 in each group) with isolated anteromedial knee osteoarthritis and meeting specific criteria were prospectively included in the study. Clinical outcomes included Knee Society Score (KSS) and Forgotten joint score while pain evaluation was performed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Functional outcomes were assessed measuring the knee range of motion (ROM) while radiographic outcomes were evaluated measuring the amelioration of the varus deformity through the hip–knee–ankle angle (HKA).ResultsClinical and functional outcomes did not significantly differ between the two groups. Complications occurred in 9.5% of OS and 4.7% of ERAS group patients. Significant improvements in knee ROM, VAS pain, KSS and HKA angle were observed postsurgery, with no significant differences between groups except in KSS expectations and function trends.ConclusionThe OS protocol is safe and effective and LOS, in a well‐defined fast‐track protocol, did not significantly impact clinical and functional outcomes. OS may lead to reduced hospitalisation costs and potential reductions in complications associated with prolonged stays, benefiting both patients and healthcare facilities. However, further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow‐up periods is needed to confirm these findings. Early mobilisation and rehabilitation protocols are key components of successful patient recovery following UKA procedures.Level of EvidenceLevel II.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.