BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to compare the new combination of intraarticular + subacromial injection, with intraarticular, subacromial injection and interscalenic brachial plexus block as postoperative analgesia in shoulder arthroscopy. METHODS:One hundred and twenty patients scheduled for shoulder arthroscopy were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of five groups: intraarticular, subacromial, interscalenic brachial plexus block (IBPB), intraarticular + subacromial (intraarticular + subacromial) injection or a control group. All patients received standardized general anaesthesia and all the injections were given with the same dose and volume of local anaesthetic. The number of boluses (fentanyl 1 microg kg(-1) delivered by a patient-controlled analgesia pump applied at the end of the surgery and the visual analogue pain score (VAPS) at 0, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 h after the intervention were recorded. A patient satisfaction score was also assessed at 24 h. RESULTS:Mean bolus consumption, compared with control group, was significantly less in all groups (P < 0.01). Intraarticular + subacromial group utilized fewer boluses compared with subacromial group and significantly lower boluses than intraarticular group (P < 0.01), but IBPB group utilized significantly fewer boluses than intraarticular + subacromial group. Patients in IBPB, intraarticular + subacromial and subacromial groups showed VAPSs that were significantly better than that of the control group at all time points (P < 0.01). The VAPS in intraarticular + subacromial group was statistically comparable with those in IBPB and subacromial groups at each time interval. IBPB and intraarticular + subacromial groups showed comparable patient satisfaction scores. CONCLUSION: These results confirm the analgesic efficacy of IBPB for shoulder surgery. Nonetheless, the combination of intraarticular and subacromial infiltration, studied for the first time, appears to be a clinically valid alternative with no clinical meaningful adverse effects.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to compare the new combination of intraarticular + subacromial injection, with intraarticular, subacromial injection and interscalenic brachial plexus block as postoperative analgesia in shoulder arthroscopy. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients scheduled for shoulder arthroscopy were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of five groups: intraarticular, subacromial, interscalenic brachial plexus block (IBPB), intraarticular + subacromial (intraarticular + subacromial) injection or a control group. All patients received standardized general anaesthesia and all the injections were given with the same dose and volume of local anaesthetic. The number of boluses (fentanyl 1 microg kg(-1) delivered by a patient-controlled analgesia pump applied at the end of the surgery and the visual analogue pain score (VAPS) at 0, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 h after the intervention were recorded. A patient satisfaction score was also assessed at 24 h. RESULTS: Mean bolus consumption, compared with control group, was significantly less in all groups (P < 0.01). Intraarticular + subacromial group utilized fewer boluses compared with subacromial group and significantly lower boluses than intraarticular group (P < 0.01), but IBPB group utilized significantly fewer boluses than intraarticular + subacromial group. Patients in IBPB, intraarticular + subacromial and subacromial groups showed VAPSs that were significantly better than that of the control group at all time points (P < 0.01). The VAPS in intraarticular + subacromial group was statistically comparable with those in IBPB and subacromial groups at each time interval. IBPB and intraarticular + subacromial groups showed comparable patient satisfaction scores. CONCLUSION: These results confirm the analgesic efficacy of IBPB for shoulder surgery. Nonetheless, the combination of intraarticular and subacromial infiltration, studied for the first time, appears to be a clinically valid alternative with no clinical meaningful adverse effects.
Authors: Jeffrey Kay; Muzammil Memon; Thomas Hu; Nicole Simunovic; Andrew Duong; James Paul; George Athwal; Olufemi R Ayeni Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-12-28
Authors: Justin J Turcotte; Dimitri M Thomas; Cyrus J Lashgari; Sohail Zaidi; James J York; Jeffrey M Gelfand; Benjamin M Petre; Daniel E Redziniak Journal: J Orthop Date: 2020-08-26
Authors: Olufunke Dada; Alicia Gonzalez Zacarias; Corinna Ongaigui; Marco Echeverria-Villalobos; Michael Kushelev; Sergio D Bergese; Kenneth Moran Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-09-05 Impact factor: 3.390