Periarticular cocktail injection is more useful than nerve blocks for pain management after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Tomoyuki Kanayama , Junsuke Nakase , Rikuto Yoshimizu , Yoshihiro Ishida , Yusuke Yanatori , Yu Arima , Naoki Takemoto
{"title":"Periarticular cocktail injection is more useful than nerve blocks for pain management after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction","authors":"Tomoyuki Kanayama ,&nbsp;Junsuke Nakase ,&nbsp;Rikuto Yoshimizu ,&nbsp;Yoshihiro Ishida ,&nbsp;Yusuke Yanatori ,&nbsp;Yu Arima ,&nbsp;Naoki Takemoto","doi":"10.1016/j.asmart.2024.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is commonly associated with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. Notably, various pain control strategies, a femoral nerve block (FNB) with a lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (LFCNB), adductor canal block (ACB) with LFCNB, or periarticular cocktail injection (PI), have been investigated. However, no studies compare the effects of FNB with LFCNB, ACB with LFCNB, and PI for pain control after ACL reconstruction. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of FNB with LFCNB, ACB with LFCNB, and PI for pain relief in the early postoperative period after ACL reconstruction.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective controlled clinical trial enrolled 299 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction at our hospital between April 2016 and October 2022. We categorized these cases into groups based on the use of PI (PI group), FNB with LFCNB (FNB group), and ACB with LFCNB (ACB group) for pain management. We selected 40 cases each, with matched age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) from each group, resulting in 120 cases for analysis. In the FNB and ACB groups, 0.75% ropivacaine 15 ml was injected under ultrasound guidance preoperatively. In the PI group, a mixture of 0.75% ropivacaine 20 ml, normal saline 20 ml, and dexamethasone 6.6 mg was injected half at the start of surgery and the rest just before wound closure. Patient demographics (age, sex, height, body weight, and BMI) and surgical data (the requirement for meniscal repair, operative time, and tourniquet inflation time) were analyzed. After ACL reconstruction, patients' numerical rating scale pain scores (NRS) (0-10) were recorded at 30 min and 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. NRS were then compared among the three groups using analysis of variance. In addition, within each group, these data were compared between the NRS ≥7 and NRS ≤6 groups using a <em>t</em>-test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were no significant differences in patient demographics and surgical data. Pain scores were significantly higher in the PI group than in the FCB and ACB groups 30 min postoperatively, but they were lower at 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. In the FNB group, there were no significant differences in the demographic and surgical data by NRS pain score. In the ACB group, the number of men was significantly higher in the NRS ≥7 group than in the NRS ≤6 group (p = 0.015). In the PI group, tourniquet inflation time was significantly longer in the NRS ≥7 group than in the NRS ≤6 group (p = 0.008).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Following ACL reconstruction using a hamstring autograft, periarticular cocktail significantly reduced early postoperative pain compared with nerve block combinations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44283,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Sport Medicine Arthroscopy Rehabilitation and Technology","volume":"36 ","pages":"Pages 45-49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214687324000086/pdfft?md5=3b7acfad299c4c4112a8d48722f6563b&pid=1-s2.0-S2214687324000086-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Sport Medicine Arthroscopy Rehabilitation and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214687324000086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is commonly associated with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain. Notably, various pain control strategies, a femoral nerve block (FNB) with a lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (LFCNB), adductor canal block (ACB) with LFCNB, or periarticular cocktail injection (PI), have been investigated. However, no studies compare the effects of FNB with LFCNB, ACB with LFCNB, and PI for pain control after ACL reconstruction. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of FNB with LFCNB, ACB with LFCNB, and PI for pain relief in the early postoperative period after ACL reconstruction.

Methods

This retrospective controlled clinical trial enrolled 299 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction at our hospital between April 2016 and October 2022. We categorized these cases into groups based on the use of PI (PI group), FNB with LFCNB (FNB group), and ACB with LFCNB (ACB group) for pain management. We selected 40 cases each, with matched age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) from each group, resulting in 120 cases for analysis. In the FNB and ACB groups, 0.75% ropivacaine 15 ml was injected under ultrasound guidance preoperatively. In the PI group, a mixture of 0.75% ropivacaine 20 ml, normal saline 20 ml, and dexamethasone 6.6 mg was injected half at the start of surgery and the rest just before wound closure. Patient demographics (age, sex, height, body weight, and BMI) and surgical data (the requirement for meniscal repair, operative time, and tourniquet inflation time) were analyzed. After ACL reconstruction, patients' numerical rating scale pain scores (NRS) (0-10) were recorded at 30 min and 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. NRS were then compared among the three groups using analysis of variance. In addition, within each group, these data were compared between the NRS ≥7 and NRS ≤6 groups using a t-test.

Results

There were no significant differences in patient demographics and surgical data. Pain scores were significantly higher in the PI group than in the FCB and ACB groups 30 min postoperatively, but they were lower at 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively. In the FNB group, there were no significant differences in the demographic and surgical data by NRS pain score. In the ACB group, the number of men was significantly higher in the NRS ≥7 group than in the NRS ≤6 group (p = 0.015). In the PI group, tourniquet inflation time was significantly longer in the NRS ≥7 group than in the NRS ≤6 group (p = 0.008).

Conclusions

Following ACL reconstruction using a hamstring autograft, periarticular cocktail significantly reduced early postoperative pain compared with nerve block combinations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在前十字韧带重建术后的疼痛治疗中,关节周围鸡尾酒注射比神经阻滞更有效
背景前交叉韧带(ACL)重建术通常伴有中度到重度的术后疼痛。值得注意的是,各种疼痛控制策略,包括股神经阻滞(FNB)与股外侧皮神经阻滞(LFCNB)、内收肌阻滞(ACB)与 LFCNB 或关节周围鸡尾酒注射(PI),都已得到研究。然而,目前还没有研究比较 FNB 与 LFCNB、ACB 与 LFCNB 和 PI 对前交叉韧带重建后疼痛控制的效果。本研究旨在评估 FNB 联合 LFCNB、ACB 联合 LFCNB 和 PI 对前交叉韧带重建术后早期疼痛缓解的影响。方法这项回顾性对照临床试验纳入了 2016 年 4 月至 2022 年 10 月期间在我院接受初级前交叉韧带重建术的 299 例患者。我们根据使用 PI(PI 组)、FNB 与 LFCNB(FNB 组)和 ACB 与 LFCNB(ACB 组)止痛的情况将这些病例分为几组。我们从每组中各选取了 40 个年龄、性别和体重指数(BMI)相匹配的病例,共 120 个病例进行分析。在 FNB 和 ACB 组,术前在超声引导下注射 0.75% 罗哌卡因 15 毫升。在 PI 组,0.75% 罗哌卡因 20 毫升、生理盐水 20 毫升和地塞米松 6.6 毫克的混合物一半在手术开始时注射,其余在伤口闭合前注射。对患者的人口统计学特征(年龄、性别、身高、体重和体重指数)和手术数据(半月板修复要求、手术时间和止血带充气时间)进行了分析。前交叉韧带重建术后,记录患者在术后 30 分钟、4、8、12、24、48 和 72 小时的疼痛评分(NRS)(0-10)。然后采用方差分析法对三组患者的 NRS 进行比较。此外,在每组中,使用 t 检验比较 NRS ≥7 组和 NRS ≤6 组之间的数据。术后30分钟,PI组的疼痛评分明显高于FCB组和ACB组,但在术后12、24、48和72小时疼痛评分较低。在 FNB 组中,按 NRS 疼痛评分计算的人口统计学和手术数据无明显差异。在 ACB 组中,NRS ≥7 组的男性人数明显高于 NRS ≤6 组(P = 0.015)。在 PI 组中,NRS ≥7 组的止血带充气时间明显长于 NRS ≤6 组(p = 0.008)。结论使用腘绳肌自体移植进行前交叉韧带重建后,与神经阻滞组合相比,关节周围鸡尾酒能明显减轻术后早期疼痛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
98 days
期刊介绍: The Asia-Pacific Journal of Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation and Technology (AP-SMART) is the official peer-reviewed, open access journal of the Asia-Pacific Knee, Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine Society (APKASS) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Society of Knee, Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine (JOSKAS). It is published quarterly, in January, April, July and October, by Elsevier. The mission of AP-SMART is to inspire clinicians, practitioners, scientists and engineers to work towards a common goal to improve quality of life in the international community. The Journal publishes original research, reviews, editorials, perspectives, and letters to the Editor. Multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines will be the trend in the coming decades. AP-SMART provides a platform for the exchange of new clinical and scientific information in the most precise and expeditious way to achieve timely dissemination of information and cross-fertilization of ideas.
期刊最新文献
Factors affecting the therapeutic effects of multiple intra-articular injections of platelet-rich-plasma for knee osteoarthritis Early intervention of extracorporeal shockwave therapy sustained positive long-term effect on rotator cuff healing: A randomized controlled trial with 3-year follow-up The residual laxity of medial collateral ligament after magic point pie crusting MCL released in arthroscopic management of medial meniscus Fast rehabilitation does not worsen clinical, radiological, and arthroscopic outcomes after medial meniscus posterior root repair: A retrospective comparative study ACL injury characteristics in badminton : A registry study with prospectively collected data on sports related epidemiology and injury mechanism of 539 badminton players
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1