• Xing-Qi Zhao, Nan Jiang, Fei-Fei Yuan, Lei Wang, and Bin Yu.
• Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
• J Anesth. 2016 Oct 1; 30 (5): 745-54.

PurposeAlthough several studies have compared the clinical efficacy of an adductor canal block (ACB) to that of a femoral nerve block (FNB) for analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), disputes mainly exist in the recovery of quadriceps strength and mobilization ability between the two methods. The aim of the present study was to compare, in a systematic review and meta-analysis, the clinical efficacy of ACB with that of FNB.MethodsWe systematically searched randomized controlled trials comparing FNB with ACB for analgesia after TKA in Pubmed and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 30th 2015. There was no limitation of publication language. Trial quality was assessed using the modified Jadad scale, and eligible data were pooled for meta-analysis.ResultsFive studies of 348 patients were included. Outcomes showed that patients who received ACB had similar or better recovery of quadriceps strength and mobilization ability than those that underwent FNB. Similar efficacy was found between the two strategies regarding adductor strength, pain scores [at rest (p = 0.86), at or after knee flexion (p = 0.31)], opioid consumption (p = 0.99), opioid-associated adverse effects (p = 0.60), length of hospital stay (p = 0.42), patient satisfaction (p = 0.57), and success rate of blockade (p = 0.20).ConclusionsThe present study suggests that TKA patients who receive ACB can achieve similar or even better recovery of quadriceps strength and mobilization ability than those treated with FNB. Taken as a whole, ACB may be a better analgesia strategy after TKA at present.

28 keywords...

hide…