Femoral nerve block using lower concentration ropivacaine preserves quadriceps strength while providing similar analgesic effects after knee arthroscopy.
Femoral nerve block
Knee arthroscopy
Postoperative pain
Quadricep strength
Ropivacaine
Journal
Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA
ISSN: 1433-7347
Titre abrégé: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9314730
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
13
03
2023
accepted:
10
08
2023
medline:
27
10
2023
pubmed:
28
8
2023
entrez:
28
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Femoral nerve block (FNB) is widely used in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy. However, the most commonly used concentration of ropivacaine (0.2% or above) may cause an unexpected decrease in the muscle strength of the quadriceps. Therefore, a lower concentration of ropivacaine (0.1%) for FNB was administered to investigate the effect on quadriceps strength and postoperative pain after knee arthroscopy. This was a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial (ChiCTR2000041404). A total of 83 patients scheduled for elective knee arthroscopy were randomized to receive 0.1% or 0.2% ropivacaine for FNB under ultrasound guidance. The primary outcomes were quadriceps strength and numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score. Quadriceps strength was measured before surgery and 6 h and 24 h after surgery, while NRS score was recorded before surgery, at the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), and 6 h and 24 h after surgery. Multiple linear regression tests were used to compare the differences in quadriceps strength and NRS score between the two groups. Two-factor analysis of variance, using the factors group and time of measurement, was used for repeated NRS scores. Secondary outcomes included knee mobility, side effects, patient satisfaction, and length of hospital stay. The mean (SD) quadriceps strength at 6 h after surgery was 7.5 (5.7) kg for the 0.1% ropivacaine group and 3.0 (4.4) kg for the 0.2% ropivacaine group. The mean difference adjusted for baseline characteristics was - 5.2 (95% CI - 7.2 to - 3.1) kg (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in quadriceps strength at 24 h after surgery. The mean differences in the average NRS score and maximum NRS score in the PACU were - 0.6 (P = 0.008) and - 1.0 (P < 0.001), respectively. There was no significant difference in NRS score at 6 h or 24 h after surgery. Two-factor analysis of variance showed no significant difference in the interaction factors of time and group for average NRS score and maximum NRS score. Compared with 0.2% ropivacaine, 0.1% ropivacaine for FNB preserved quadriceps strength at 6 h after knee arthroscopy while providing similar analgesic effects. I.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37638985
doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07549-y
pii: 10.1007/s00167-023-07549-y
pmc: PMC10598127
doi:
Substances chimiques
Ropivacaine
7IO5LYA57N
Anesthetics, Local
0
Analgesics
0
Analgesics, Opioid
0
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4988-4995Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 82201362
Organisme : Clinical Research Project from Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital
ID : YNCR2C024
Organisme : Clinical Research Project from Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital
ID : SHYCS03
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Clin Anesth. 2021 Aug;71:110257
pubmed: 33823459
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 Oct;143(10):6305-6313
pubmed: 37432497
Orthop J Sports Med. 2021 Jul 22;9(7):23259671211017516
pubmed: 34368383
J Pain Res. 2022 Apr 15;15:1091-1105
pubmed: 35450062
Mil Med Res. 2021 Mar 5;8(1):17
pubmed: 33673879
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2022 Sep 1;39(9):743-757
pubmed: 35852550
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Apr-Jun;34(2):242-246
pubmed: 30104837
Cureus. 2022 Apr 10;14(4):e24007
pubmed: 35547414
Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Feb 13;11(1):e110904
pubmed: 34221939
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2013 Nov-Dec;38(6):526-32
pubmed: 24121608
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Sep;46(9):784-805
pubmed: 33990439
Med Sci Monit. 2021 Oct 11;27:e932848
pubmed: 34629461
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Aug;28(7):1121-4
pubmed: 23265274
Eur J Pain. 2022 Oct;26(9):1979-1989
pubmed: 35959735
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Jul;28(7):2334-2342
pubmed: 31781802
Drugs. 2005;65(18):2675-717
pubmed: 16392884
Saudi J Anaesth. 2020 Jan-Mar;14(1):85-90
pubmed: 31998025
Anaesthesia. 2014 Jul;69(7):678-82
pubmed: 24862380
Mod Rheumatol. 2021 Sep;31(5):1038-1044
pubmed: 33274662
Open Access J Sports Med. 2021 Sep 04;12:129-138
pubmed: 34512045
J Orthop Surg Res. 2022 Mar 21;17(1):175
pubmed: 35313897
Am J Sports Med. 2023 Jan;51(1):279-297
pubmed: 35437023
Acta Orthop. 2020 Feb;91(1):3-19
pubmed: 31663402
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2000 Jan;1(2):325-36
pubmed: 11249552
Am J Sports Med. 2015 Feb;43(2):331-6
pubmed: 25466410
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Aug 12;23(1):768
pubmed: 35953812
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019 Jun;105(4):633-637
pubmed: 30928275
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Jun;28(6):1894-1900
pubmed: 31317214
Am J Sports Med. 2020 Jul;48(9):2305-2313
pubmed: 31800300
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Sep;98(39):e17358
pubmed: 31574881
Can J Anaesth. 2004 Nov;51(9):886-91
pubmed: 15525613
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021 Nov;29(11):3551-3559
pubmed: 33895879
J Ren Nutr. 2017 May;27(3):194-200
pubmed: 28320574
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Nov;46(11):971-985
pubmed: 34433647
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2022 Apr;41(2):101030
pubmed: 35123105