Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29086337›Full record

Trial reportMusculoskeletal surgery2018

Comparative analysis of influence of adductor canal block and multimodal periarticular infiltration versus adductor canal block alone on pain and knee range of movement after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective non-randomised study.

S R Sankineani, A R C Reddy, K S Ajith Kumar, K K Eachempati, A V G Reddy

Abstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Controversial Topics in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A 5-Year Update (Part 1).Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

S R SankineaniDepartment of Orthopaedics, Sunshine Hospital, P.G. Road, Secunderabad, Telangana, India. sukeshrao.sankineni@gmail.com.
A R C ReddyDepartment of Anaesthesia, Mediciti Institute of Medical Sciences, Medchal, Hyderabad, India.
K S Ajith KumarDepartment of Orthopaedics, Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences, Hassan, Karnataka, India.
K K EachempatiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Maxcure Hospital, Madhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
A V G ReddyDepartment of Orthopaedics, Sunshine Hospital, P.G. Road, Secunderabad, Telangana, India.
Mediciti Institute of Medical Sciences · INInstitute of Medical Sciences · INMaxCure Hospitals · INSunshine Hospitals · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePain management after total knee arthroplasty has seen many recent advances such as peripheral nerve blocks in order to improve the functional outcome and reduce morbidity after surgery. Adductor canal block (ACB) and multimodal periarticular infiltration (MPI) are two techniques that have been proven to be efficacious individually. We hypothesized that the combination of ACB with MPI would reduce pain and improve knee range of movement (ROM) compared to ACB alone.

methodsA prospective non-randomized study was conducted from July 2015 to December 2015 in our institution in a total of 200 consecutive patients undergoing unilateral total knee arthroplasty who were either given ACB alone (Group 1, n = 100 patients) or ACB + MPI (Group 2, n = 100 patients). All the patients were assessed for severity of pain by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 8, 24, 48 h postoperatively and knee ROM after 48 h.

resultsPatients in ACB + MPI group had significantly better VAS scores at 8 h postoperatively but showed no significant difference at 24 and 48 h compared to ACB group. Patients in ACB + MPI group showed significantly better knee ROM after 48 h.

conclusionsOur study concludes that patients receiving ACB + MPI have demonstrated better VAS scores in the immediate postoperative period but have no significant difference at the time of discharge.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNerve BlockPain ManagementPain MeasurementPostoperative PainProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularRecovery of FunctionAdductor canal blockArthroplastyKneeMultimodal infiltration

Identifiers

PMID29086337
OpenAlexW2767089159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.