ABSTRACT
Abstract Background and objectives: Inadequate pain relief after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction affects mobility leading to development of adhesions, weakened ligament insertion and muscle atrophy. Adductor canal block for postoperative analgesia preserves quadriceps strength. The present study was conducted to compare pain free period in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, receiving ultrasound-guided adductor canal block with ropivacaine alone and ropivacaine with clonidine. Methods: A prospective randomized double blinded study was conducted including sixty-three adult, ASA class I, II patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. They were randomized into three groups: Group S - control group received adductor canal block with 30 mL saline, Group R - ropivacaine group received adductor canal block with 30 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine and Group RC - clonidine group received adductor canal block with 30 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine with clonidine 1 µg.kg-1. The primary aim was to compare the pain free period in patients receiving adductor canal block with ropivacaine alone or ropivacine with clonidine. The secondary outcomes were pain score at rest and movement, total analgesic requirement, sedation score and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Results: The mean pain free periods were 20 min, 384.76 min and 558.09 min for Group S, Group R and Group RC, respectively and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between Group R and Group RC in terms of pain scores at rest and movement and total analgesic requirement. Conclusion: Addition of clonidine to ropivacaine in USG guided adductor canal block led to significant prolongation of pain free period though pain score at rest and movement, and rescue analgesic requirement, did not differ.
Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: O alívio inadequado da dor após a reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior afeta a mobilidade, leva ao desenvolvimento de aderências, inserção do ligamento enfraquecido e atrofia muscular. O bloqueio do canal adutor para analgesia pós-operatória preserva a força do quadríceps. O presente estudo foi feito para comparar o período sem dor em pacientes de reconstrução artroscópica do ligamento cruzado anterior, submetidos ao bloqueio do canal adutor guiado por ultrassom com ropivacaína isolada e ropivacaína + clonidina. Métodos: Um estudo prospectivo, randômico e duplo-cego foi conduzido com 63 pacientes adultos, estado físico ASA I-II, submetidos à reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior. Os pacientes foram randomizados em três grupos: Grupo S, que recebeu bloqueio do canal adutor com 30 mL de solução salina para controle; Grupo R, que recebeu bloqueio do canal adutor com 30 mL de ropivacaína a 0,375%; Grupo RC, que recebeu bloqueio do canal adutor com 30 mL de ropivacaína a 0,375% e 1 µg.kg-1 de clonidina. O desfecho primário do estudo foi comparar o período sem dor nos pacientes que receberam bloqueio do canal adutor com ropivacaína isolada ou ropivacina + clonidina. Os desfechos secundários foram escores de dor em repouso e movimento, necessidade total de analgésicos, escore de sedação, além de náusea e vômito no pós-operatório. Resultados: Os períodos médios sem dor foram 20 min, 384,76 min e 558,09 min para os grupos S, R e RC, respectivamente, e essa diferença foi estatisticamente significativa (p < 0,001). Não houve diferença significativa entre os grupos R e RC em termos de escores de dor em repouso e movimento e a necessidade total de analgésicos. Conclusão: A adição de clonidina à ropivacaína em bloqueio do canal adutor guiado por ultrassom levou a um prolongamento significativo do período sem dor, embora os escores de dor em repouso e movimento, e a necessidade de analgésico de resgate, não tenham diferido.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Young Adult , Arthroscopy/methods , Clonidine/administration & dosage , Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction/methods , Ropivacaine/administration & dosage , Nerve Block/methods , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Double-Blind Method , Prospective Studies , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods , Drug Therapy, Combination , Analgesics/administration & dosage , Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inadequate pain relief after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction affects mobility leading to development of adhesions, weakened ligament insertion and muscle atrophy. Adductor canal block for postoperative analgesia preserves quadriceps strength. The present study was conducted to compare pain free period in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, receiving ultrasound-guided adductor canal block with ropivacaine alone and ropivacaine with clonidine. METHODS: A prospective randomized double blinded study was conducted including sixty-three adult, ASA class I, II patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. They were randomized into three groups: Group S - control group received adductor canal block with 30mL saline, Group R - ropivacaine group received adductor canal block with 30mL of 0.375% ropivacaine and Group RC - clonidine group received adductor canal block with 30mL of 0.375% ropivacaine with clonidine 1µg.kg-1. The primary aim was to compare the pain free period in patients receiving adductor canal block with ropivacaine alone or ropivacine with clonidine. The secondary outcomes were pain score at rest and movement, total analgesic requirement, sedation score and postoperative nausea and vomiting. RESULTS: The mean pain free periods were 20min, 384.76min and 558.09min for Group S, Group R and Group RC, respectively and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between Group R and Group RC in terms of pain scores at rest and movement and total analgesic requirement. CONCLUSION: Addition of clonidine to ropivacaine in USG guided adductor canal block led to significant prolongation of pain free period though pain score at rest and movement, and rescue analgesic requirement, did not differ.