Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39127622›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024

Comparison ultrasound-guided adductor canal block and surgeon-performed block for pain management after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled study.

Mehmet Fevzi Cakmak, Levent Horoz, Fatma Nur Arslan, Onur Utku Demir, Kerem Basarir

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06533085 (Comparison Ultrasound-Guided Adductor Canal Block and Surgeon-Performed Block for Pain Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06533085 nacompletednot on this map

Comparison Ultrasound-Guided Adductor Canal Block and Surgeon-Performed Block for Pain Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorKirsehir Ahi Evran UniversitesiRan2021 to 2022Enrolled240ConditionsOsteoarthrosis Knee Arthroplasty Analgesia Pain ManagementArmsAdductor canal block by surgeon
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Mehmet Fevzi CakmakDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Kirsehir Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey. mehmet.cakmak@ahievran.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9338-8232
Levent HorozDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Kirsehir Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey.
Fatma Nur ArslanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Kirsehir Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey.
Onur Utku DemirDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Kirsehir Ahi Evran University, Kirsehir, Turkey.
Kerem BasarirDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Halic University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAdductor canal block (ACB) is widely performed for postoperative analgesia for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study is to compare surgeon-assisted and anesthesiologist-assisted (ultrasound-guided) adductor blocks in terms of postoperative analgesic efficacy.

methodsThis study was designed as a double-blind, prospective and randomized trial. A total of 240 participants were randomly allocated to three groups: one where the surgeon performed the adductor canal block (ACBs), another where it was conducted by an anesthetist with ultrasound guidance (ACBa), and a third group without the adductor block. The follow-up management after the Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) procedure occurred on the first, third, and tenth days, as well as the twelfth week. Outcome measures comprised pain assessment using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and monitoring opioid analgesic consumption.

resultsNo significant differences in demographic profiles were observed between the groups. Groups ACBa and ACBs exhibited significantly lower VAS scores compared to the control group at both 3 and 12 h after surgery, with group ACBa showing the lowest VAS scores among all groups. However, at 1 day, 3 days, 10 days and 12 weeks after surgery, there was no significant difference in VAS scores between the ACBa and ACBs groups. On the first three days, the ACBa group had the lowest opioid consumption and the lowest total opioid consumption. The differences in VAS scores between the groups began to decrease on the first day after surgery.

conclusionThe adductor canal block (ACB) has been demonstrated to be an effective method of reducing pain in patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR) in the postoperative period. Nevertheless, despite the pronounced impact that ACB performed by an anesthesiologist under ultrasound guidance has on VAS scores according to intraoperative ACB by surgeons, its effect on clinical outcomes has not been demonstrated. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: This study was retrospectively registered with the Clinical Trials Registry Platform on July 31, 2024 (NCT06533085).

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, KneeNerve BlockPain MeasurementPostoperative PainUltrasonography, InterventionalAgedAnalgesics, OpioidDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain ManagementProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnalgesics, OpioidAdductor Canal BlockOpioidsPost-op PainTotal knee arthroplastyVisual Analog Scale

Identifiers

PMID39127622
PMCPMC11316281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.