4.5 Article

Impact of the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block on postoperative analgesia and functional recovery following total hip arthroplasty: a randomised, observer-masked, controlled trial

期刊

ANAESTHESIA
卷 76, 期 11, 页码 1492-1498

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15536

关键词

anaesthesia; analgesia; arthroplasty; hip surgery; postoperative pain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pericapsular nerve group block significantly reduced pain and opioid consumption, improved hip motion range, and promoted early functional recovery in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.
The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a novel regional anaesthesia technique that aims to provide hip analgesia with preservation of motor function, although evidence is currently lacking. In this single-centre, observer-masked, randomised controlled trial, patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty received pericapsular nerve group block or no block (control group). Primary outcome measure was maximum pain scores (0-10 numeric rating scale) measured in the first 48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption; patient mobilisation assessments; and length of hospital stay. Sixty patients were randomly allocated equally between groups. The maximum pain score of patients receiving the pericapsular nerve group block was significantly lower than in the control group at all time-points, with a median (IQR [range]) of 2.5 (2.0-3.7 [0-7]) vs. 5.5 (5.0-7.0 [2-8]) at 12 h; 3 (2.0-4.0 [0-7]) vs. 6 (5.0-6.0 [2-8]) at 24 h; and 2.0 (2.0-4.0 [0-5]) vs. 3.0 (2.0-4.7 [0-6]) at 48 h; all p < 0.001. Moreover, the pericapsular nerve group showed a significant reduction in opioid consumption, better range of hip motion and shorter time to ambulation. Although no significant difference in hospital length of stay was detected, our results suggest improved postoperative functional recovery following total hip arthroplasty in patients who received pericapsular nerve group block.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据