Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37291487›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2023

A randomized controlled trial of iliopsoas plane block vs. femoral nerve block for hip arthroplasty.

Chun-Guang Wang, Zhi-Qiang Zhang, Yang Yang, Yu-Bin Long, Xiu-Li Wang, Yan-Ling Ding

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
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.

Chun-Guang WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Central Hospital of Baoding, Northern Great Wall Street 320#, Baoding, 071000, Hebei, China. wangchunguang@163.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9130-6934
Zhi-Qiang ZhangDepartment of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, The First Central Hospital of Baoding, Baoding, 071000, China.
Yang YangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Central Hospital of Baoding, Northern Great Wall Street 320#, Baoding, 071000, Hebei, China.
Yu-Bin LongDepartment of Orthopedics, The First Central Hospital of Baoding, Baoding, 071000, Hebei, China.
Xiu-Li WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, 050051, China.
Yan-Ling DingDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Central Hospital of Baoding, Northern Great Wall Street 320#, Baoding, 071000, Hebei, China.
Baoding People's Hospital · CNHebei Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIliopsoas plane block (IPB) is a novel analgesic technique for hip surgery that retains quadriceps strength. However, evidence from randomized controlled trial is remains unavailable. We hypothesized that IPB, as a motor-sparing analgesic technique, could match the femoral nerve block (FNB) in pain management and morphine consumption, providing an advantage for earlier functional training in patients underwent hip arthroplasty.

methodsWe recruited ninety patients with femoral neck fracture, femoral head necrosis or hip osteoarthritis who were scheduled for unilateral primary hip arthroplasty were recruited and received either IPB or FNB. Primary outcome was the pain score during hip flexion at 4 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included quadriceps strength and pain scores upon arrival at post anesthesia care unit (PACU) and at 2, 4, 6, 24, 48 h after surgery, the first time out of bed, total opioids consumption, patient satisfaction, and complications.

resultsThere was no significant difference in terms of pain score during hip flexion at 4 h after surgery between the IPB group and FNB group. The quadriceps strength of patients receiving IPB was superior to those receiving FNB upon arrival at PACU and at 2, 4, 6 and 24 h after surgery. The IPB group showed a shorter first time out of bed compared to the FNB group. However, there were no significant differences in terms of pain scores within 48 h after surgery, total opioids consumption, patient satisfaction and complications between the two groups.

conclusionIPB was not superior to FNB in terms of postoperative analgesia for hip arthroplasty. However, IPB could serve as an effective motor-sparing analgesic technique for hip arthroplasty, which would facilitate early recovery and rehabilitation. This makes IPB worth considering as an alternative to FNB.

trial registrationThe trial was registered prior to patient enrollment at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200055493; registration date: January 10, 2022; enrollment date: January 18, 2022; https://www.chictr.org.cn/searchprojEN.html ).

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipNerve BlockAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidFemoral NerveHumansPostoperative PainAnalgesicsAnalgesics, OpioidFemoral nerve blockHip arthroplastyIliopsoas plane block

Identifiers

PMID37291487
PMCPMC10249315
OpenAlexW4379881207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.