ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Is regional only anesthesia a safe choice in anticoagulated hip fracture patients?
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perioperative Anemia and Transfusion Management in Older Adults with Osteoporotic Hip Fractures: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence and Emerging Strategies.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
methodsThis study assessed the safety of the lateral femoral cutaneous and over the hip (LOH) block, a regional anesthetic, in anticoagulated hip fracture patients while maintaining efficacy. A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with hip fractures (AO/OTA 31A/B) who presented to a single academic medical center and level 1 trauma center actively using oral anticoagulants. Patients were grouped based on anesthesia type: LOH block (LOH) versus general anesthesia (GA) and LOH versus spinal anesthesia (SA). LOH patients were matched based on anticoagulant type, OTA/AO classification, and risk (STTGMA) score with a 3:1 ratio to GA and a 1:1 ratio to SA. Outcome comparisons included: time to surgery, operative and anesthesia time, and bleeding complications, demographics (age, sex, race, BMI, CCI, and STTGMA), postoperative complications, 90-day readmission rates, mortality within 1 year, and discharge location.
resultsA total of 135 patients: 27 LOH, 27 SA, and 81 GA, were analyzed. Compared to GA, LOH block patients had a shorter time to surgery (1.31 ± 0.082 vs. 0.89 ± 0.69, p = 0.014), lower rates of 90-day readmission (3.7% vs. 19.8%, p = 0.047), and a greater discharge to home with health services rate (33.3% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.024). The GA population trended-toward more major complications (p = 0.077) and mortality within 1 year (p = 0.077). Compared to SA, LOH patients were slightly underweight (25.1 ± 4.19 vs. 22.7 ± 4.16, p = 0.035) and got to surgery faster (0.89 ± 0.69 vs 1.54 ± 1.48, p = 0.039). Across all groups, there were no differences in the need for blood transfusion or other quality markers.
conclusionThe LOH block was safe and effective for use in anticoagulated hip fracture patients. This technique provided an intraoperative safety profile similar to other anesthetic choices, allowed for less delay to surgery compared to spinal anesthesia and improved discharge parameters compared to GA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: Prognostic Level III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41087586What 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.