Trial reportEuropean radiology2024
Ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve block for femoral arterial access gain and closure: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in European radiology, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary High-Grade Intraperitoneal Sarcoma Mimicking a Germ Cell Tumor in an 8-Year-Old Girl in Somaliland: A Diagnostic Challenge.International medical case reports journal · 2026Article
- A Didactic Ultrasound Manual for identifying lumbar Plexus Peripheral Nerves in the lower limb: Lower Abdominal Wall, Groin and Thigh.Ultrasound international open · 2026Review
- Comparison of ultrasound-guided supraclavicular nerve block combined with clavipectoral fascial plane block versus supraclavicular nerve block along with the upper trunk of brachial plexus "The SCUT block" in clavicle surgery: A single-centre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Single-point ultrasound-guided iliohypogastric-ilioinguinal-genitofemoral nerve block for inguinal hernia surgery in older adult patients: a randomized controlled trial.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of the femoral branch block of the genitofemoral nerve (FBB) versus local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) for femoral arterial access gain and closure.
methodsEighty-two patients (age, 64.8 ± 10.9 years; female, 30.5%) undergoing endovascular procedures using 5-Fr femoral sheath were assigned to either FBB (n = 41) or LIA (n = 41). In both groups, 2% lidocaine HCL with 1:100,000 epinephrine was used as an anesthetic solution. Pain scores during access gain and closure were evaluated using a visual analog scale (score 0-10), patient satisfaction levels with the quality of anesthesia were scored on a 7-point Likert scale, and adverse events were recorded.
resultsThe primary endpoint, pain scores during access closure, was significantly lower in the FBB group than in the LIA group (0.1 ± 0.37 vs 1.73 ± 0.92; p < 0.001). The FBB group also had significantly lower pain scores during access gain compared to the LIA group (0.83 ± 0.83 vs 2.78 ± 1.26; p < 0.001). There was an inverse relationship between pain scores and FBB after adjustment for age, gender, and body mass index (p < 0.001). FBB group reported significantly higher satisfaction with anesthesia quality compared to the LIA group (6.49 ± 0.64 vs 4.05 ± 1.05; p < 0.001). No complications were recognized in either group.
conclusionsUltrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve blocks offered better acute pain relief and higher patient satisfaction than LIA during femoral arterial access gain and closure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: In this prospective randomized controlled trial, ultrasound-guided genitofemoral nerve blocks offered better acute pain relief than local infiltration anesthesia, resulting in enhanced patient satisfaction. KEY POINTS: • FBB provided better pain relief during access gain and closure than LIA. • FBB offered higher patient satisfaction with the quality of anesthesia than LIA. • No anesthesia-related or access site complications were recognized in either treatment group.
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.