Infiltration of local anesthetic in the Interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee "IPACK block" versus adductor canal block "ACB" for pain relief after open wedge high tibial osteotomy: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: A high tibial osteotomy is usually associated with severe postoperative pain. Both adductor canal block (ACB) and interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee (IPACK) have been described as effective block techniques for providing analgesia after knee surgeries, with few comparisons in wedge osteotomy cases. We aim to compare the postoperative analgesic profile of the previously mentioned two block techniques in patients undergoing tibial osteotomies. METHODS: Sixty patients were enrolled in this randomized prospective trial (30 received IPACK and 30 received ACB). Both blocks were installed before the spinal anesthesia after infiltration of 2 mL lidocaine 2%. Twenty mL of bupivacaine 0.25% mixed with dexamethasone as anesthetic adjuvant were used for both blocks. The postoperative analgesic profiles were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Postoperative pain scores were lower in the IPACK group, and that decrease was evident throughout the first 10 hours postoperatively. Additionally, the duration of analgesia was much prolonged with the same block (487.50±82.39 vs. 301.93±92.06 minutes with ACB). There was a significant decline in postoperative analgesic consumption (1.27±0.45 vs. 1.8±0.61 gm, P=0.000), and a significant increase in the ambulation distance (19.10±0.60 vs. 17.73±0.45 m, P=0.000) with a significant decline in the duration of hospitalization (43.27±7.61 vs. 54±8.35 hours) in the IPACK group compared to the ACB group. CONCLUSIONS: IPACK is a superior block technique compared to ACB in patients undergoing high tibial osteotomy regarding postoperative analgesia, ambulation distance, and patient satisfaction with little rate of adverse events in both groups.

Combined pulsed and thermal radiofrequency versus thermal radiofrequency alone in the treatment of recurrent trigeminal neuralgia after microvascular decompression: A double blinded comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent trigeminal neuralgia (RTN) is a common clinical problem and pain recurs in many patients after microvascular decompression (MVD). We evaluated the effect of adding pulsed radiofrequency to radiofrequency thermocoagulation at 60°C compared to radiofrequency thermocoagulation at 70°C alone in the treatment of recurrent trigeminal neuralgia after microvascular decompression. METHODS: 40 patients with recurrent trigeminal neuralgia after microvascular decompression were randomly divided into two equal groups. Group A: received prolonged duration of pulsed radiofrequency followed by less destructive thermocoagulation, while group B: received sole thermocoagulation. Then patients followed up for 2 years to evaluate the success rate by the Barrow Neurological Institute Pain Intensity (BNI) Scale, complications, and the need to medical treatment. RESULTS: The success rate was 100% in both groups at discharge (BNI < III). It was 83.3% and 78.7% after 6 months, 77.8% and 68.4% after 12 month, 72.2% and 68.4% after 18 months and 66.7% and 63.1% after 24 months in group A and B, respectively (p > .05). In group A 88.9% of patients stopped tegretol treatment after the procedure compared to 84.2% in group B (p = .32). 88.9% compared to 89.5% % in group A and B, respectively, did not use tricyclic antidepressant (p = .61). The overall complications in group A was 5.61%, while it was 36.8% in group B (p = .025). CONCLUSION: Combined pulsed and thermal radiofrequency can significantly reduce the incidence of the side effects/complications with similar success rate than using thermal radiofrequency alone in treatment of recurrent trigeminal neuralgia after microvascular decompression.