To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Lumbar plexus block vs periarticular infiltration with ropivacaine or liposomal bupivacaine in THA

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
June 2018

Lumbar plexus block vs periarticular infiltration with ropivacaine or liposomal bupivacaine in THA

Vol: 7| Issue: 6| Number:3| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Continuous Posterior Lumbar Plexus Nerve Block Versus Periarticular Injection with Ropivacaine or Liposomal Bupivacaine for Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Three-Arm Randomized Clinical Trial

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 Nov 1;99(21):1836-1845

Contributing Authors:
MW Pagnano MP Abdel RL Johnson SL Kopp CB Mantilla AW Amundson HP Sviggum TM Mabry DR Schroeder

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

165 patients scheduled for total hip arthroplasty were randomized to one of three groups for postoperative analgesia: periarticular infiltration with ropivacaine (PAI-R), periarticular infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine (PAI-L), or peripheral nerve block (PNB) via a continuous lumbar plexus block. The primary outcome was maximum pain severity experienced during the morning of postoperative da...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue