ArticleAnesthesiology research and practice2026
Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Versus Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block for Hip Arthroplasty: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials With Trial Sequential Analysis.
Article in Anesthesiology research and practice, 2026. 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.
- Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Versus Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block for Hip Arthroplasty: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials With Trial Sequential Analysis.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Regional anesthesia techniques are crucial for optimizing pain management after hip arthroplasty. The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block represents a novel approach targeting specific neural structures for hip joint innervation. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of PENG block compared to suprainguinal fascia iliaca compartment block (S-FICB) in adult patients undergoing hip arthroplasty, focusing on postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores, and mobilization time. Methods: We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed and Scopus databases through October 2025. Only randomized controlled trials comparing PENG block with S-FICB were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool. Meta-analysis employed random effects modeling, with evidence strength evaluated using GRADE methodology. Results: Five randomized controlled trials (824 patients) were included. PENG block significantly reduced 24-h opioid consumption compared to S-FICB (MD -3.85 mg, 95% CI -6.61 to -1.09, Conclusions: PENG block provides statistically significant reductions in opioid consumption and pain scores, with robust and clinically meaningful earlier mobilization compared to S-FICB in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. These findings support incorporating PENG block into multimodal enhanced recovery pathways, though heterogeneity in analgesic outcomes warrants cautious interpretation.
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.