Department of Orthopedics, Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital Affiliated to Nanchang University, 92 Aiguo Road, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, 17 Yongwaizheng Street, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Aug;28(8):2675-2686. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-05933-6. Epub 2020 Mar 12.
Moderate-to-severe postoperative pain remains a challenge for both patients and surgeons after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this study was to systematically review the current evidence in the literature to compare adductor canal block (ACB) with femoral nerve block (FNB) in the treatment of ACLR.
A comprehensive search of the published literature in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed. Only English randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included in this study. The primary outcome was pain score. Secondary outcome measures included opioid consumption, postoperative adverse events, patient satisfaction, and quadriceps strength.
Eight RCTs with a total of 587 patients were included. No statistically significant difference was observed between the ACB and FNB groups in pain scores at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, or 48 h; cumulative opioid consumption at 24 h or 48 h; patient satisfaction at 24 or 48 h; and postoperative adverse event. However, ACB showed superior quadriceps strength in the early postoperative period.
Both treatments provided similar overall pain relief after ACLR. The potential benefits of quadriceps preservation with ACB are worthy of future study. Therefore, ACB is recommended as an attractive alternative to FNB as the peripheral nerve block of choice for ACLR.
Meta-analysis of Level 1 was performed in this study.
前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)后,中重度术后疼痛仍然是患者和外科医生面临的挑战。本研究旨在系统回顾文献中的现有证据,比较收肌管阻滞(ACB)与股神经阻滞(FNB)在 ACLR 治疗中的效果。
对 PubMed、Scopus、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中已发表的文献进行全面检索。本研究仅纳入英文随机临床试验(RCT)。主要结局指标为疼痛评分。次要结局指标包括阿片类药物消耗、术后不良事件、患者满意度和股四头肌力量。
纳入了 8 项 RCT,共 587 例患者。在 6 h、12 h、24 h 和 48 h 的疼痛评分、24 h 和 48 h 的累积阿片类药物消耗、24 h 和 48 h 的患者满意度以及术后不良事件方面,ACB 组与 FNB 组之间均无统计学差异。然而,ACB 在术后早期显示出更好的股四头肌力量。
两种治疗方法在 ACLR 后均能提供相似的整体疼痛缓解效果。ACB 对股四头肌的保护作用可能具有潜在益处,值得进一步研究。因此,ACB 被推荐作为 FNB 的一种有吸引力的替代方案,作为 ACLR 的首选外周神经阻滞方法。
本研究进行了 1 级荟萃分析。