SynthesisBMC anesthesiology2026
The effect of fascia Iliaca compartment block in patients with total hip arthroplasty under general vs. spinal anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) in reducing postoperative opioid consumption and pain scores in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) under either general or spinal anesthesia.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FICB with placebo/no block in THA patients. The primary outcome was postoperative opioid consumption in the first 24 h, while secondary outcomes included pain scores at 6, 12, and 24 h at rest postoperatively, and the occurrence of complication. Subgroup analyses were performed based on anesthesia type (general vs. spinal anesthesia). Furthermore, sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were conducted for primary outcome.
resultsTwelve RCTs involving 928 patients were included. FICB significantly reduced 24-hour opioid consumption (mean difference: -8.21 mg, 95% CI: -11.50 to -4.91, P < 0.001). Heterogeneity was low under general anesthesia (I² = 0%) but high under spinal anesthesia (I² = 85%). However, the subgroup difference was not significant. Pain scores at 12 h favored FICB (MD: -0.52, 95% CI: -0.80 to -0.23, P < 0.001), but no significant differences were observed at 6, 24, and 48 h. FICB reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39–0.96, P = 0.03). FICB demonstrated a borderline significant increase in the risk of quadriceps weakness (RR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.02 to 10.37, P = 0.05). No significant subgroup differences were detected among secondary outcomes. TSA indicated insufficient evidence for conclusive opioid-sparing effects. GRADE ratings revealed low-to-moderate quality evidence for most outcomes.
conclusionFICB reduces early postoperative opioid consumption at 24 h and the pain score at 12 h with low quality evidence. The observed heterogeneity may be partly attributable to anesthesia type, but no subgroup differences were detected, Further large-scale RCTs are needed to clarify the optimal use of FICB in special anesthesia contexts. STUDY REGISTRATION: The protocol of this meta-analysis has been registered in the PROSPERO database ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ; Registration Number: CRD42025634214).
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.