Comparative efficacy analysis of ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block and lumbar plexus block in hip arthroscopy: a pilot prospective randomized controlled trial.

Liangjing Yuan, Chengshi Xu, Ye Zhang, Geng Wang
Author Information
  1. Liangjing Yuan: Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100000, China.
  2. Chengshi Xu: Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100000, China.
  3. Ye Zhang: Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100000, China.
  4. Geng Wang: Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100000, China. ORCID

Abstract

Controlled trials assessing quadratus lumborum block (QLB) for post-operative analgesia in hip surgery are scarce. This study aimed to compare ultrasound-guided QLB and lumbar plexus block (LPB) for clinical efficacy in hip arthroscopy. Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy in Beijing Jishuitan Hospital in January-June 2019 were randomized to the lumbar plexus (L) and quadratus lumborum (Q) groups ( = 25/group). After either ultrasound-guided block for 30 min, both groups were prepared for surgery after muscle strength measurement in the affected limbs. Opioid doses for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), visual analog scale (VAS) scores in the resting and active states, upon leaving the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), and at 2-48 h post-surgery were recorded, and post-operative complications were also recorded. Muscle strength in the affected limbs was significantly higher in the Q group compared with the L group (4.0 versus 2.0,  < 0.001). VAS scores were similar in both groups post-surgery ( > 0.05). One patient had epidural spread in the L group, with no other complications. Compared with ultrasound-guided LPB, ultrasound-guided QLB provides similar and good post-operative analgesia after hip arthroscopy, with less impact on muscle strength and fewer complications. These results should be confirmed in larger trials.

References

  1. Anesthesiology. 2008 Oct;109(4):683-8 [PMID: 18813048]
  2. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2018 Jul - Aug;68(4):396-399 [PMID: 28549524]
  3. Anesthesiol Res Pract. 2011;2011:159541 [PMID: 21716721]
  4. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 Jul/Aug;42(4):446-450 [PMID: 28277419]
  5. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2013 Sep;6(3):235-41 [PMID: 23852421]
  6. Paediatr Anaesth. 2013 Oct;23(10):959-61 [PMID: 23927552]
  7. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2016 Mar;63(3):141-8 [PMID: 26302669]
  8. Orthop J Sports Med. 2020 Oct 28;8(10):2325967120960689 [PMID: 33195723]
  9. Arthroscopy. 2016 Jul;32(7):1286-92 [PMID: 27067059]
  10. Clin J Pain. 2021 May 1;37(5):366-371 [PMID: 33577193]
  11. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2017 Jan - Feb;67(1):107-109 [PMID: 25487690]
  12. Clin Sports Med. 2016 Jul;35(3):503-521 [PMID: 27343399]
  13. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Oct;29(4):550-2 [PMID: 24249997]
  14. Trials. 2020 Feb 5;21(1):142 [PMID: 32024551]
  15. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Nov/Dec;41(6):757-762 [PMID: 27755488]
  16. Anaesthesia. 2014 Nov;69(11):1227-40 [PMID: 24974961]
  17. J Int Med Res. 2020 May;48(5):300060520920996 [PMID: 32356470]
  18. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999 Nov-Dec;24(6):563-8 [PMID: 10588563]
  19. Rev Bras Ortop. 2014 May 14;50(3):245-53 [PMID: 26229924]
  20. Anesthesiology. 2021 May 1;134(5):722-733 [PMID: 33740816]
  21. Br J Anaesth. 2016 Sep;117(3):387-94 [PMID: 27543534]
  22. J Clin Monit Comput. 2017 Apr;31(2):331-336 [PMID: 27033707]
  23. Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Jul 08;4(3):e19407 [PMID: 25289374]
  24. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2016 May 13;3(3):181-9 [PMID: 27583156]
  25. Anaesthesia. 2017 Feb;72(2):230-232 [PMID: 27891579]
  26. A A Case Rep. 2015 Feb 1;4(3):34-6 [PMID: 25642956]
  27. Pain Res Manag. 2020 Mar 7;2020:1035182 [PMID: 32256907]
  28. J Clin Anesth. 2016 Jun;31:35 [PMID: 27185672]
  29. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018 Feb 26;5:44 [PMID: 29536008]
  30. Br J Anaesth. 2014 Jul;113(1):188-9 [PMID: 24942716]
  31. Anesth Analg. 2017 Jul;125(1):303-312 [PMID: 28277325]
  32. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 Jan/Feb;42(1):125-126 [PMID: 27997495]
  33. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Sep;32(9S):S28-S31 [PMID: 28336246]
  34. Anesth Analg. 2012 Oct;115(4):968-72 [PMID: 22822195]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0blockhipultrasound-guidedquadratuslumborumQLBpost-operativeanalgesialumbarplexusarthroscopyLgroupsstrengthcomplicationsgrouptrialssurgeryLPBefficacyrandomizedQmuscleaffectedlimbsVASscorespost-surgeryrecorded0similarControlledassessingscarcestudyaimedcompareclinicalPatientsundergoingBeijingJishuitanHospitalJanuary-June2019 = 25/groupeither30 minpreparedmeasurementOpioiddosespatient-controlledPCAvisualanalogscalerestingactivestatesuponleavingpost-anesthesiacareunitPACU2-48 halsoMusclesignificantlyhighercompared4versus2< 0001 > 005OnepatientepiduralspreadComparedprovidesgoodlessimpactfewerresultsconfirmedlargerComparativeanalysisarthroscopy:pilotprospectivecontrolledtrial

Similar Articles

Cited By