Comparison of epidural anesthesia with the combination adductor canal and ipack block in knee arthroplasty patients

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorscopusid58414343100
dc.authorscopusid55279418300
dc.authorscopusid26028989300
dc.authorscopusid58169036000
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Mehmet Murat
dc.contributor.authorFakioglu, Onur
dc.contributor.authorUrfali, Senem
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Omer Faruk
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-19T15:41:25Z
dc.date.available2024-09-19T15:41:25Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.departmentHatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: Motor function-preserving peripheral nerve blocks have begun to play an important role in multimodal analgesic approaches of the patients with total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study is to compare the effects of anesthesia methods on postoperative analgesia and early rehabilitation of patients after total knee arthroplasty. Methods: In this retrospective study, in which patients with unilateral TKA were screened, two groups were formed from selected patients. Group EA was administered 0.03 mg kg-1 of morphine with 10 cc saline through the epidural catheter in the postoperative period. In Group Adductor Canal Block (ACB)+ infiltration of local anesthetic between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee block (IPACK), 10 mL 0.5% bupivacaine, 10 mL 2% lidocaine and 20 mL local anesthetic mixtures were made separately for ACB and IPACK blocks at one time. Primary postoperative outcome was Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), secondary outcomes were physical therapy ambulation test results. Results: In this study, postoperative pain score rates as the primary outcome were measured as follows: VAS8: 5 / 4 (p=0.041); VAS12: 5 / 4 (p=0.004) and VAS24: 4 / 3 (p=0.001) and lower pain scores were obtained in the ACB + IPACK group. In timed up to go (TUG) tests, TUG24 was 36/34 (p=0.001), TUG48 32.5/30 (p=0.012) and TUG72 20/12. Better ROM measurements were recorded in group ACB+IPACK at both 24 and 48 hours. Conclusion: In the ACB + IPACK group, better pain scores, more significant ambulation values, and less side-effect profile were obtained. © 2024 Anestezi Dergisi. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.54875/jarss.2024.82787
dc.identifier.endpage68en_US
dc.identifier.issn1300-0578
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85190835081en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage62en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.54875/jarss.2024.82787
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12483/14255
dc.identifier.volume32en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAnestezi Dergisien_US
dc.relation.ispartofAnestezi Dergisien_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAdductor canal blocken_US
dc.subjectAnalgesiaen_US
dc.subjectEpidural analgesiaen_US
dc.subjectTotal knee arthroplastyen_US
dc.titleComparison of epidural anesthesia with the combination adductor canal and ipack block in knee arthroplasty patientsen_US
dc.title.alternativeDiz artroplasti hastalarinda epidural anestezi ile adduktor kanal ve ipack blok kombinasyonunun karsilastirilmasien_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
Tam Metin / Full Text
Boyut:
288.63 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
İndir

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu