Department of Anesthesiology, Jinshan Branch of Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai 201599, China.
Day surgery centre, the First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China.
J Clin Anesth. 2024 Sep;96:111490. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111490. Epub 2024 Apr 30.
A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare the analgesic efficacy of the following nerve block techniques: femoral nerve block (FNB), adductor canal block (ACB), infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (iPACK), and genicular nerve block (GNB) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).
We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until September 20, 2022. Patients who were treated by any of the above four nerve block techniques (alone or in combination) after TKA were included. Patients who underwent minimally invasive knee surgery were excluded. The indicators included pain scores during rest and mobilization, opioid consumption after surgery, postsurgical mobilization function (ROM [range of motion], TUG [Timed-Up-and-Go] test) at 24 h and 48 h, and length of hospital stay. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool.
Forty-two studies involving 2857 patients were eligible for this study. This NMA suggested that ACB + iPACK was the most efficacious option for improving ambulation ability and shortening the length of hospital stay. Furthermore, ACB + iPACK was the best regimen for resting-pain and movement-pain relief (78% and 87%, respectively) and for reducing opioid consumption (90%) at 48 h. However, FNB + iPACK was the most efficacious option for relief of resting pain (42%) and reducing opioid consumption (68%) at 24 h; GNB was the most efficacious option for movement pain relief at 24 h (94%).
Considering both pain control and knee functional recovery, ACB + iPACK may be the optimal analgesic regimen for patients after TKA. At the same time, it significantly reduces pain and opioid consumption at 48 h. However, ACB + iPACK is not the recommended technique for short-term (24 h) pain control.
PROSPERO (CRD42022362322).
采用贝叶斯网络荟萃分析比较以下神经阻滞技术的镇痛效果:股神经阻滞(FNB)、收肌管阻滞(ACB)、腘窝动脉与膝关节囊之间浸润(iPACK)和髁神经阻滞(GNB)在全膝关节置换术后(TKA)。
系统评价和网络荟萃分析(NMA)。
我们检索了 Web of Science、PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Library 数据库,检索时间截至 2022 年 9 月 20 日。纳入接受上述四种神经阻滞技术(单独或联合)治疗的 TKA 患者。排除接受微创膝关节手术的患者。指标包括休息和活动时的疼痛评分、术后阿片类药物消耗量、术后 24 小时和 48 小时的术后活动功能(ROM[运动范围]、TUG[计时起立行走]测试)和住院时间。采用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。
纳入 42 项研究,共 2857 例患者符合条件。这项 NMA 表明,ACB+iPACK 是改善活动能力和缩短住院时间最有效的方案。此外,ACB+iPACK 在缓解静息痛和运动痛方面(分别为 78%和 87%)以及减少术后 48 小时内阿片类药物消耗(90%)方面是最佳方案。然而,FNB+iPACK 是缓解 24 小时内静息疼痛(42%)和减少阿片类药物消耗(68%)最有效的方案;GNB 是缓解 24 小时内运动疼痛最有效的方案(94%)。
考虑到疼痛控制和膝关节功能恢复,ACB+iPACK 可能是 TKA 后患者的最佳镇痛方案。同时,它在 48 小时内显著减轻疼痛和阿片类药物的消耗。然而,ACB+iPACK 不推荐用于短期(24 小时)疼痛控制。
PROSPERO(CRD42022362322)。