To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

THA: Use of LIA or intrathecal morphine show no difference in occurrence of adverse events

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
June 2013

THA: Use of LIA or intrathecal morphine show no difference in occurrence of adverse events

Vol: 2| Issue: 5| Number:9| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Local infiltration analgesia with levobupivacaine compared with intrathecal morphine in total hip arthroplasty patients

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Jul;56(6):695-705. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2012.02667.x. Epub 2012 Mar 7

Contributing Authors:
R Rikalainen-Salmi JG Förster K Mäkelä P Virolainen KA Leino MT Pitkänen PJ Neuvonen KS Kuusniemi

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

60 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) under spinal anesthesia were included in this study to compare the occurrence of adverse outcomes between two analgesic treatments. Patients were randomized to receive either local infiltration analgesia (LIA) or intrathecal morphine (it-M) after THA. When examined during the first 48 hours post-operatively, there was no significant difference in...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue