Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35984519›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2023

Periarticular injection and hamstring block versus placebo for pain control in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A randomized controlled trial.

Joaquín De Lamo-Rovira, Francisco López-Caba, Juan Giménez-Giménez, Witold Szczepan, Jose Luis Quijada-Rodriguez, Montserrat Solera-Martínez

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Research progress on early postoperative pain management strategies after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2024
    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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joaquín De Lamo-RoviraDepartment of Orthopaedics, Virgen de La Luz Hospital, Hermandad Donantes de Sangre street, 16004, Cuenca, Spain. drjlamo@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7522-6862
Francisco López-CabaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Virgen de La Luz Hospital, Hermandad Donantes de Sangre street, 16004, Cuenca, Spain.
Juan Giménez-GiménezDepartment of Orthopaedics, Virgen de La Luz Hospital, Hermandad Donantes de Sangre street, 16004, Cuenca, Spain.
Witold SzczepanDepartment of Orthopaedics, Virgen de La Luz Hospital, Hermandad Donantes de Sangre street, 16004, Cuenca, Spain.
Jose Luis Quijada-RodriguezDepartment of Orthopaedics, Virgen de La Luz Hospital, Hermandad Donantes de Sangre street, 16004, Cuenca, Spain.
Montserrat Solera-MartínezHealth and Social Research Center and Faculty of Nursing, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Edificio Melchor Cano. Santa Teresa Jornet S/N, Cuenca, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6661-078X
Hospital Virgen de la Luz · ESUniversity of Castilla-La Mancha · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo study the effectiveness of periarticular infiltration (PI), including the proximal donor site vs. placebo in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

methodA total of 44 patients were randomized in two groups assigned to receive PI or placebo. The perioperative protocol was the same for both groups. The principal outcome was pain measured at 8 and 24 h by a visual analog scale (VAS). The pain was registered in the knee and the proximal donor site. Pain scores were also assessed to determine whether the VAS improvement would reach the threshold values reported for the minimal clinically significant difference. The secondary outcome was the need for opioid rescue medication.

resultsPatients receiving PI exhibited lower pain values in the knee at 8 h (mean PI 35.00 ± 5.76 vs. placebo 60.23 ± 4.52 p = 0.01) and at 24 h (mean PI 37.23 ± 5.62 vs. placebo 55.55 ± 3.41 p = 0.008). These results were above the threshold for clinical significance. No improvements were found in proximal donor site pain and consumption of opioid rescue medication. Complications were comparable between the two groups.

conclusionPI significantly reduced pain in the knee vs. placebo after ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft at 8 and 24 h after surgery. The instillation of part of the mixture in the proximal hamstring stump did not result in any improvement LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAnalgesics, OpioidAnterior Cruciate LigamentHumansPain ManagementPostoperative PainAnalgesics, OpioidAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionLocal anestheticPostoperative analgesiaPostoperative pain

Identifiers

PMID35984519
OpenAlexW4292314579

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.