Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2026
Comparison of the 4-in-1 block technique with femoral and adductor canal blocks in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05643040 (Comparison of Perioperative Analgesic Efficacy in Patients Who Had Femoral Nerve Block, Adductor Canal Block and 4in1 Block Applied in Knee Surgery), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of Perioperative Analgesic Efficacy in Patients Who Had Femoral Nerve Block, Adductor Canal Block and 4in1 Block Applied in Knee Surgery
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the 4-in-1 block technique with femoral nerve block (FNB) and adductor canal block (ACB) in terms of perioperative pain and opioid consumption in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).
methodsThe trial was retrospectively registered. In this randomized controlled trial, patients scheduled for ACLR under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to one of three groups: 4-in-1 block, FNB, or ACB. All blocks were performed under ultrasound guidance with 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine approximately 45 min before surgery. Intraoperative remifentanil use, postoperative 24-hour intravenous morphine equivalents (IME) consumption, and pain scores measured by the numerical rating scale (NRS) were recorded. Overall postoperative pain burden was additionally assessed using the 0-24-hour NRS area under the curve (AUC). An exploratory post-hoc non-inferiority analysis was performed.
resultsA total of 60 patients were equally divided among the groups. Intraoperative remifentanil consumption, postoperative 24-hour IME consumption, and the 0-24-hour NRS AUC values did not differ significantly among the groups (p = 0.842, p = 0.502, and p = 0.958, respectively). Compared with the ACB group, the 4-in-1 block group used, on average, 0.8 mg less postoperative 24-hour IME (90% confidence interval [CI], - 5.61-4.01). Compared with the FNB group, 24-hour IME use was 2.8 mg greater (90% CI, - 1.48-7.08). In both comparisons, the upper bounds of the two-sided 90% CIs did not exceed the exploratory post-hoc non-inferiority margin (Δ = 10 mg).
conclusionIn patients undergoing ACLR, the 4-in-1 block did not differ significantly from FNB or ACB in terms of analgesic outcomes. These exploratory findings require further investigation to clarify the role of the 4-in-1 block in perioperative pain management for ACLR.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05643040. Registered 23 November 2022. Retrospectively registered.
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.