Single-injection or Continuous Femoral Nerve Block for Total Knee Arthroplasty?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The ideal local anesthetic regime for femoral nerve block that balances analgesia with mobility after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains undefined. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared two volumes and concentrations of a fixed dose of ropivacaine for continuous femoral nerve block after TKA to a single injection femoral nerve block with ropivacaine to determine (1) time to discharge readiness; (2) early pain scores and analgesic consumption; and (3) functional outcomes, including range of motion and WOMAC scores at the time of recovery. METHODS: Ninety-nine patients were allocated to one of three continuous femoral nerve block groups for this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial: a high concentration group (ropivacaine 0.2% infusion), a low concentration group (ropivacaine 0.1% infusion), or a placebo infusion group (saline 0.9% infusion). Infusions were discontinued on postoperative Day (POD) 2. The primary outcome was time to discharge readiness. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, pain, and functional outcomes. Ninety-three patients completed the study protocol; the study was halted early because of unanticipated changes to pain protocols at the host institution, by which time only 61% of the required number of patients had been enrolled. RESULTS: With the numbers available, the mean time to discharge readiness was not different between groups (high concentration group, 62 hours [95% confidence interval [CI], 51-72 hours]; low concentration group, 73 hours [95% CI, 63-83 hours]; placebo infusion group 65 hours [95% CI, 56-75 hours]; p = 0.27). Patients in the low concentration group consumed significantly less morphine during the period of infusion (POD 1, high concentration group, 56 mg [95% CI, 42-70 mg]; low concentration group, 35 mg [95% CI, 27-43 mg]; placebo infusion group, 48 mg [95% CI, 38-59 mg], p = 0.02; POD 2, high concentration group, 50 mg [95% CI, 41-60 mg]; low concentration group, 33 mg [95% CI, 24-42 mg]; placebo infusion group, 39 mg [95% CI, 30-48 mg], p = 0.04); however, there were no important differences in pain scores or opioid-related side effects with the numbers available. Likewise, there were no important differences in functional outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, which was terminated prematurely before the desired sample size could be achieved, we were unable to demonstrate that varying the concentration and volume of a fixed-dose ropivacaine infusion for continuous femoral nerve block influences time to discharge readiness when compared with a conventional single-injection femoral nerve block after TKA. A low concentration of ropivacaine infusion can reduce postoperative opioid consumption but without any important differences in pain scores, side effects, or functional outcomes. These pilot data may be used to inform the statistical power of future randomized trials. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».