Users Online: 1390 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Login 


RSACP wishes to inform that it shall be discontinuing the dispatch of print copy of JOACP to it's Life members. The print copy of JOACP will be posted only to those life members who send us a written confirmation for continuation of print copy.
Kindly email your affirmation for print copies to dranjugrewal@gmail.com preferably by 30th June 2019.

 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 34  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 242-246

Ultrasound-guided adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament repair under general anesthesia


Department of Anesthesia, Srimati Kashibai Navale Medical College and General Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Priyanka S Shalu
Department of Anesthesia, Srimati Kashibai Navale Medical College and General Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP_172_17

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: Adductor canal block (ACB) is now an established component of multimodal analgesia for knee replacement surgery and is slowly replacing femoral nerve block (FNB). It is also gaining popularity for providing pain relief in knee arthroscopies including anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery (ACLR). Data is lacking from the Indian subcontinent on comparing ACB to the traditional FNB for ACLR. Hence, we conducted the present study to compare ACB and FNB in ACLR under general anesthesia. Material and Methods: Sixty patients were randomized to receive either ACB or FNB under ultrasound guidance. Postoperatively, quadriceps muscle strength (straight leg raise and time up and go; TUG test) and quality of analgesia (numeric rating scale; NRS and patient satisfaction score) were assessed every 6 hour, and thereafter, up to 48 hours. The time of rescue analgesia and total analgesic consumption (tramadol) were also recorded. Data was statistically analyzed and P < 0.05 was considered to be significant. Results: Patients receiving ACB had significantly less quadriceps weakness (P < 0.001) compared to FNB on postoperative day (POD) 1. In addition, patient satisfaction score was statistically higher (P < 0.05) in FNB on POD1. Both the above parameters were comparable on POD2. No statistically significant difference was recorded in NRS, time for rescue analgesia, and total analgesic consumption among the two groups. Conclusion: ACB preserves quadriceps motor strength while providing analgesia comparable to FNB in patients undergoing ACLR. However, patient satisfaction score is better with FNB than ACB.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1794    
    Printed65    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal