Buscar en
Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (English Edition)
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (English Edition) Comparison of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and epidural analgesia follo...
Journal Information
Vol. 69. Issue 10.
Pages 632-639 (December 2022)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Visits
3
Vol. 69. Issue 10.
Pages 632-639 (December 2022)
Original article
Comparison of pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and epidural analgesia following total hip arthroplasty: A retrospective analysis
Comparación del bloqueo del grupo de nervios pericapsulares (PENG) y la analgesia epidural después de una artroplastia total de cadera: análisis retrospectivo
Visits
3
I. Pires Sousa
Corresponding author
ines.mp.sousa@gmail.com

Corresponding author.
, C.I. Leite da Silva Peixoto, L.A. Fernandes Coimbra, F.M. da Costa Rodrigues
Serviço de Anestesiologia, Centro Hospitalar Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, E.P.E., Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
This item has received
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Figures (1)
Abstract
Introduction and objectives

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an increasingly common orthopaedic procedure, with moderate to severe postoperative pain. Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a recent block that seems to provide adequate analgesia without significant motor blockade.

The aim of this study is to retrospectively compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of PENG block with those of epidural analgesia, in patients undergoing THA.

Material and methods

This is a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent primary THA, submitted to epidural analgesia or single-shot ultrasound-guided PENG block, during a one-year period.

Data regarding demographic characteristics, surgery and anaesthesia techniques, pain scores, opioid consumption, complications and time to hospital discharge were retrieved from institutional records and compared between the 2 groups (epidural analgesia vs PENG block).

Results

No significant difference was found regarding pain scores, opioid consumption, and mean time to hospital discharge between the 2 groups. Pain scores at rest (1.20 epidural vs 1.67 PENG) or with movement (3.95 epidural vs 3.72 PENG) were similar between groups. Total number of complications was higher in the epidural analgesia group (50 % epidural vs 5% PENG). Paresthesia was reported in both groups. Motor block, sedation, nausea and catheter-related complications were only found in the epidural analgesia group.

Conclusions

PENG block seems to be equivalent to epidural analgesia regarding quality of postoperative analgesia for patients subject to primary THA, supporting routine use of this block in these patients. The low rate of reported complications limits conclusions on this topic.

Keywords:
Epidural analgesia
PENG block
Total hip arthroplasty
Postoperative pain
Resumen
Introducción y objetivos

La artroplastia total de cadera (THA) es un procedimiento traumatológico cada vez más común, que comporta dolor postoperatorio de moderado a severo. El bloqueo del grupo de nervios pericapsulares (PENG) es un bloqueo reciente que parece aportar analgesia adecuada sin bloqueo motor significativo.

El objeto de este estudio es comparar retrospectivamente la eficacia analgésica y la seguridad del bloqueo PENG y la analgesia epidural, en pacientes sometidos a THA.

Material y métodos

Se trata de un estudio retrospectivo observacional durante un periodo de un año de los pacientes sometidos a THA primaria, utilizando analgesia epidural o bloqueo PENG ecoguiado con inyección única.

Los datos relativos a las características demográficas, técnicas quirúrgicas y anestésicas, puntuaciones de dolor, consumo de opioides, complicaciones y tiempo hasta el alta hospitalaria se recopilaron de los registros institucionales, comparándose entre los dos grupos (analgesia epidural vs bloqueo PENG).

Resultados

No se encontraron diferencias significativas en cuanto a las puntuaciones de dolor, el consumo de opioides y el tiempo medio hasta el alta hospitalaria entre los dos grupos. Las puntuaciones de dolor en reposo (1,2 epidural vs 1,67 PENG) o con movimiento (3,95 epidural vs 3,72 PENG) fueron similares entre ambos grupos. El número total de complicaciones fue superior en el grupo de analgesia epidural (50% epidural vs 5% PENG). Se reportó parestesia en ambos grupos. Solo se reportaron bloqueo motor, sedación, náuseas y complicaciones relacionadas con el catéter en el grupo de analgesia epidural.

Conclusiones

El bloqueo PENG parece ser equivalente a la analgesia epidural en cuanto a calidad de la analgesia postoperatoria para los pacientes sometidos a THA primaria, lo cual respalda el uso rutinario de este bloqueo en estos pacientes. La baja tasa de complicaciones reportadas limita las conclusiones sobre esta cuestión.

Palabras clave:
Analgesia epidural
Bloqueo PENG
Artroplastia total de cadera
Dolor postoperatorio

Article

These are the options to access the full texts of the publication Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (English Edition)
Subscriber
Subscriber

If you already have your login data, please click here .

If you have forgotten your password you can you can recover it by clicking here and selecting the option “I have forgotten my password”
Subscribe
Subscribe to

Revista Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (English Edition)

Purchase
Purchase article

Purchasing article the PDF version will be downloaded

Price 19.34 €

Purchase now
Contact
Phone for subscriptions and reporting of errors
From Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. (GMT + 1) except for the months of July and August which will be from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Calls from Spain
932 415 960
Calls from outside Spain
+34 932 415 960
E-mail
Article options
Tools
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos

Quizás le interese:
10.1016/j.redare.2021.10.002
No mostrar más