Ten Hoope Werner, Admiraal Manouk, Hermanides Jeroen, Hermanns Henning, Hollmann Markus W, Lirk Philipp, Kerkhoffs Gino M M W, Steens Jeroen, van Beek Rienk
Department of Anesthesiology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
J Clin Med. 2023 Sep 17;12(18):6019. doi: 10.3390/jcm12186019.
This study evaluated the effect of adductor canal block (ACB) versus femoral nerve block (FNB) on readiness for discharge in patients undergoing outpatient anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We hypothesized that ACB would provide sufficient pain relief while maintaining motor strength and safety, thus allowing for earlier discharge. This was a randomized, multi-center, superiority trial. From March 2014 to July 2017, patients undergoing ACL reconstruction were enrolled. The primary outcome was the difference in readiness for discharge, defined as Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System score ≥ 9. Twenty-six patients were allocated to FNB and twenty-seven to ACB. No difference in readiness for discharge was found (FNB median 1.8 (95% CI 1.0 to 3.5) vs. ACB 2.9 (1.5 to 4.7) hours, = 0.3). Motor blocks and (near) falls were more frequently reported in patients with FNB vs. ACB (20 (76.9%) vs. 1 (3.7%), < 0.001, and 7 (29.2%) vs. 1 (4.0%), = 0.023. However, less opioids were consumed in the post-anesthesia care unit for FNB (median 3 [0, 21] vs. 15 [12, 42.5] oral morphine milligram equivalents, = 0.004) for ACB. Between patients with FNB or ACB, no difference concerning readiness for discharge was found. Despite a slight reduction in opioid consumption immediately after surgery, FNB demonstrates a less favorable safety profile compared to ACB, with more motor blocks and (near) falls.
本研究评估了收肌管阻滞(ACB)与股神经阻滞(FNB)对门诊前交叉韧带(ACL)重建患者出院准备情况的影响。我们假设ACB能在维持运动强度和安全性的同时提供足够的疼痛缓解,从而实现更早出院。这是一项随机、多中心、优效性试验。2014年3月至2017年7月,纳入了接受ACL重建的患者。主要结局是出院准备情况的差异,定义为麻醉后出院评分系统得分≥9分。26例患者被分配至FNB组,27例被分配至ACB组。未发现出院准备情况存在差异(FNB组中位数为1.8小时(95%CI为1.0至3.5小时),ACB组为2.9小时(1.5至4.7小时),P = 0.3)。与ACB组相比,FNB组患者更频繁地报告出现运动阻滞和(近乎)跌倒(分别为20例(76.9%)对1例(3.7%),P < 0.001,以及7例(29.2%)对1例(4.0%),P = 0.023)。然而,FNB组在麻醉后护理单元消耗的阿片类药物较少(ACB组口服吗啡毫克当量中位数为15 [12, 42.5],FNB组为3 [0, 21],P = 0.004)。在FNB组或ACB组患者之间,未发现出院准备情况存在差异。尽管术后立即阿片类药物消耗量略有减少,但与ACB组相比,FNB组的安全性较差,运动阻滞和(近乎)跌倒更多。