Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35001951›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2021

Comparison of sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee (SPANK) block versus infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK) block when added to adductor canal block for pain control and knee rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty---A prospective randomised trial.

Shibani Padhy, Abhiruchi Yeshwant Patki, Akhya Kumar Kar, Padmaja Durga, L Sireesha

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06864663 (A Comparative Study of Combined Ultrasound-Guided Adductor Canal Block and Interspace Between the Popliteal Artery and Capsule of the Knee), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

NCT06864663 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Comparative Study of Combined Ultrasound-Guided Adductor Canal Block and Interspace Between the Popliteal Artery and Capsule of the Knee (IPACK) Versus Combined Adductor Canal Block and Genicular Nerve Block Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

TypeinterventionalSponsorAin Shams UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled70ConditionsNerve Block, Regional AnaesthesiaArmsnerve block with bupivacaine 0.25%, Nerve Block with bupivacaine 0.25%
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Shibani PadhyDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Abhiruchi Yeshwant PatkiDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Akhya Kumar KarDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Padmaja DurgaDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
L SireeshaDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsAdductor canal block (ACB), though an effective procedure for postoperative analgesia in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), does not provide analgesia to the posterior articular aspect of the knee joint. Infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK block) and sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee (SPANK block) are two single injection techniques that have been shown to provide effective analgesia in posterior knee pain. This study aims to compare the effect of IPACK block and SPANK block when combined with ACB for analgesia and postoperative rehabilitation in TKA.

methodsA total of 82 patients were randomised into two groups: (1) ACB combined with IPACK, (2) ACB combined with SPANK block. The primary outcome was the pain scores from 6 h to 48 h after surgery and the duration of postoperative analgesia. The secondary outcome measures were 24 h opioid consumption, ambulation parameters like mobilisation ability, quadriceps muscle strength and patient satisfaction score at discharge.

resultsNumerical rating scale (NRS) scores at rest and on movement, duration of analgesia, total opioid consumption, and patient satisfaction were significantly better (

conclusionACB with IPACK block offers better analgesia, less opioid consumption and better patient satisfaction with comparable knee rehabilitation parameters in the immediate postoperative period after TKA compared to ACB with SPANK block.

Indexed as

Analgesiaarthroplastykneenerve blockultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID35001951
PMCPMC8680422
OpenAlexW3215562714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

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.