Trial reportBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
Analgesic effect of continuous adductor canal block versus continuous femoral nerve block for knee arthroscopic surgery: a randomized trial.
Trial report in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Association of iPACK block and adductor canal block in dogs undergoing the tibial plateau leveling osteotomy technique: Report of 4 cases.Brazilian journal of veterinary medicine · 2024Article
- Effect of Adductor Canal Block Combined with Local Infiltration Analgesia on Postoperative Pain of Knee Arthroscopy Under General Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Pain and therapy · 2023Article
- Anesthesiology and pain medicine.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesAnterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is one of the most frequently performed orthopedic procedures. The ability to perform ACLR on an outpatient basis is largely dependent on an effective analgesic regimen. The aim of the study was to compare the analgesic effect between continuous adductor canal block (cACB) and femoral nerve block (cFNB) during arthroscopy guided ACLR.
methodIn this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial, 60 ASA I/II patients for arthroscopic ACLR were recruited. Patients in Group I received cACB and those in Group II cFNB. A bolus dose of 20 cc 0.5% levobupivacaine followed by 0.125% 5 mL.h
resultsThe time-to-first postoperative analgesic request (hours) was earlier in Group II (14.40 ± 4.32) than Group I (16.90 ± 3.37) and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The cumulative 24-h analgesic consumption (paracetamol in g) was 0.70 ± 0.47 in Group I and 1.70 ± 0.65 in Group II (p < 0.001). The painless range of motion (degree) was 55.67 ± 10.40 in Group I and 40.00 ± 11.37 in Group II (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe findings of this study suggest that continuous adductor canal block provides superior analgesia in patients undergoing arthroscopic ACLR when compared to continuous femoral nerve block.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.