ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Evaluation of Post-operative Analgesic Efficacy of Adductor Canal Block Compared to Conventional Intravenous Analgesics in Knee Arthroscopy Surgery.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 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
Background: Effective post-operative pain management is essential for early recovery and patient satisfaction following knee arthroscopy. This study aimed to evaluate the post-operative analgesic efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided adductor canal block (ACB) compared to conventional intravenous morphine analgesia. Materials and Methods: This randomized, controlled, interventional study was conducted in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) of the Department of Anesthesiology in an Indian Hospital. Eighty adult patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] I-II) undergoing unilateral knee arthroscopy under general anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups: Group M received intravenous morphine (0.1 mg/kg) before incision, and Group B received an ultrasound-guided ACB with 15 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine before extubation. Post-operative analgesic efficacy was assessed by the requirement of rescue analgesia and the time to achieve a Visual Analog Score (VAS) <3. Adverse effects and antiemetic requirements were also recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 17.0, and a P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Both groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, ASA physical status, and pre-operative vitals (P > 0.05). Rescue analgesia in the PACU was required in 47.5% of patients in Group M and 10.0% in Group B (P < 0.001). The mean time to achieve VAS <3 was significantly shorter in Group B (11.00 ± 3.79 min) compared to Group M (16.00 ± 9.00 min) (P = 0.002). The requirement of antiemetic medication was lower in Group B (20.0%) than in Group M (42.5%) (P = 0.030). No adverse events were reported in either group. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided ACB provides superior post-operative analgesia, faster pain relief, and fewer side effects compared to intravenous morphine in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy.
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.