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

Functional Recovery & Pain Control Following Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Following Hip Surgeries

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
June 2025

Functional Recovery & Pain Control Following Pericapsular Nerve Group Block Following Hip Surgeries

Vol: 307| Issue: 6| Number:85| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Functional recovery and pain control following Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block following hip surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2025 Mar 19;145(1):198.

Contributing Authors:
T Reysner G Kowalski M Reysner A Mularski P Daroszewski K Wieczorowska-Tobis

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

Synopsis

Nineteen studies including 1,682 patients undergoing hip surgery were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the PENG block versus no block or other regional anaesthesia techniques. Pooled outcomes of interest included functional recovery (motor weakness), total postoperative opioid consumption, time to first rescue analgesia, and length of hospital stay. The PENG block sig...

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