Comparative Evaluation of Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Pericapsular Nerve Group Block and Femoral Nerve Block During Positioning of Patients With Hip Fractures for Spinal Anesthesia: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Study.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fractures cause severe pain during positioning for spinal anesthesia (SA). Intravenous systemic analgesics can lead to various complications in elderly patients, hence peripheral nerve blocks are emerging as a standard of care in pain management for hip fractures, among which femoral nerve block (FNB) is widely known and practiced. Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a recently described technique that blocks the articular nerves of the hip with motor-sparing effects and is used to manage positional pain in hip fractures. This study aims to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of PENG block over FNB in managing pain during positioning before SA in hip fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. After ethical clearance, 70 patients undergoing hip fracture surgery under SA in a tertiary-care hospital were recruited and randomized to receive either ultrasound-guided PENG block or FNB with 20 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine before performing SA. We compared pain severity using the visual analog scale (VAS) 15 and 30 minutes after the block and during positioning. The sitting angle, requirement of rescue analgesia for positioning, and anesthesiologist and patient satisfaction scores were also analyzed. Continuous data were analyzed with an unpaired t-test while the chi-square test was used for categorical data. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in VAS scores after PENG block (PENG: 0.66 ± 1.05 and FNB: 1.94 ± 1.90; p = 0.001) with lesser requirement of rescue analgesia for positioning compared to FNB. The anesthesiologist and patient satisfaction scores were also significantly better in the PENG group. CONCLUSION: PENG block offers better analgesia for positioning before SA than FNB without any significant side effects, and improves patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction, thus proving to be an effective analgesic alternative for painful hip fractures.

Pre-peritoneal Plus Portal Infiltration Versus Bilateral Transversus Abdominis Plane Block in Laparoscopic Hernia Repair.

Background and objective The role of the pre-peritoneal infiltration of local anesthetic (PILA) in laparoscopic hernia repair has been equivocal. Ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block has been extensively studied. However, studies comparing these two methods are very scarce. Hence, this study was undertaken to compare the efficacy of pre-peritoneal plus portal infiltration with TAP block in this population. Materials and methods This double-blinded randomized comparative study was conducted on a total of 32 patients by allotting 16 patients in each group. Group A patients were given pre-peritoneal plus portal infiltration of 15 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine for each technique by the operating surgeon, while Group B patients were administered bilateral TAP block with 0.5% ropivacaine, 15 mL on each side under ultrasound guidance by the anesthesiologist. Results The demographic variables and duration of surgery were comparable between the two groups. Also, the postoperative requirement of fentanyl between the two groups was insignificant. However, the duration of anesthesia was significantly longer in Group B attributing to the extra time taken for the administration of the TAP blocks. Conclusion Both ultrasound-guided TAP block and the PILA plus portal infiltration are effective techniques for pain relief after laparoscopic hernia repair. Either of these two techniques can be chosen depending on the availability of resources, expertise, etc.