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

Comparison of Post-Op Analgesia and Functional Recovery for SFIB and PENG blocks in THA patients

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
March 2024

Comparison of Post-Op Analgesia and Functional Recovery for SFIB and PENG blocks in THA patients

Vol: 306| Issue: 3| Number:3| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Comparison between supra-inguinal fascia iliaca and pericapsular nerve group blocks on postoperative pain and functional recovery after total hip arthroplasty: A noninferiority randomised clinical trial.

Eur J Anaesthesiol . 2023 Sep 1;40(9):660-671.

Contributing Authors:
M Carella F Beck N Piette S Denys JP Lecoq VL Bonhomme

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

Synopsis

106 patients undergoing elective posterolateral total hip arthroplasty (PLTHA) under spinal anesthesia (SA) were included in this non inferiority randomized controlled trial in which patients were randomly allocated to receive a supra-inguinal fascia iliac block (SFIB; n=53) or pericapsular nerve group blocks (PENG; n=53). The primary outcome of interest was pain at rest measured by numeric rating...

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