Background Local infiltration analgesia and peripheral nerve blocks are common methods for pain management in patients after THA but direct head-to-head, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have not been performed. A network meta-analysis allows indirect comparison of individual treatments relative to a common comparator; in this case placebo (or no intervention), epidural analgesia, and intrathecal morphine, yielding an estimate of comparative efficacy. Questions/purposes We asked, when compared with a placebo, (1) does use of local infiltration analgesia reduce patient pain scores and opioid consumption, (2) does use of peripheral nerve blocks reduce patient pain scores and opioid consumption, and (3) is local infiltration analgesia favored over peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain management after THA? Methods We searched six databases, from inception through June 30, 2014, to identify RCTs comparing local infiltration analgesia or peripheral nerve block use in patients after THA. A total of 35 RCTs at low risk of bias based on the recommended Cochrane Collaboration risk assessment tool were included in the network meta-analysis (2296 patients). Primary outcomes for this review were patient pain scores at rest and cumulative opioid consumption, both assessed at 24 hours after THA. Because of substantial heterogeneity (variation of outcomes between studies) across included trials, a random effect model for meta-analysis was used to estimate the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% CI. The gray literature was searched with the same inclusion criteria as published One of the authors certifies that he (RJS), or a member of his or her immediate family, has or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of USD 10,000-USD 100,000, from Biomet Inc (Warsaw, IN, USA 123Clin Orthop Relat Res (2016) 474:495-516 DOI 10.1007 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® trials. Only one unpublished trial (published abstract) fulfilled our criteria and was included in this review. All other studies included in this systematic review were full published articles. Bayesian network meta-analysis included all RCTs that compared local infiltration analgesia or peripheral nerve blocks with placebo (or no intervention), epidural analgesia, and intrathecal morphine. Results Compared with placebo, local infiltration analgesia reduced patient pain scores (WMD, À0.61; 95% CI, À0.97 to À0.24; p = 0.001) and opioid consumption (WMD, À7.16 mg; 95% CI, À11.98 to À2.35; p = 0.004). Peripheral nerve blocks did not result in lower pain scores or reduced opioid consumption compared with placebo (WMD, À0.43; 95% CI, À0.99 to 0.12; p = 0.12 and WMD, À3.14 mg, 95% CI, À11.30 to 5.02; p = 0.45). However, network meta-analysis comparing local infiltration analgesia with peripheral nerve blocks through common comparators showed no differences between postoperative pain scores (WMD, À0.36; 95% CI, À1.06 to 0.31) and opioid consumption (WMD, À4....
Background Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasingly being performed in patients with long life expectancies and active lifestyles. Newer implant bearing surfaces, with superior wear characteristics, often are used in this cohort with the goal of improving longevity of the prosthesis, but comparisons across the numerous available bearing surfaces are limited, so the surgeon and patient may have difficulty deciding which implants to use. Questions/purposes The purpose of this study was to answer the following question: Is there a short-to mid-term survivorship difference between common THA bearings used in patients younger than age 65 years? Methods We conducted a systematic review to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published after 2000 that reported survivorship of ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), ceramic-on-highly crosslinked polyethylene (CoPxl), or metalon-highly crosslinked polyethylene (MoPxl) bearings. To qualify for our review, RCTs had to have a minimum 2-year followup and study patients were required to have an average age younger than 65 years. Direct-comparison meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed to combine direct and indirect evidence. IN, USA). One of the authors certifies that he (RTT), or a member of his immediate family, has received or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of less than USD 10,000 from MAKO Surgical Corp, USD 10,000 to USD 100,000 from DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc, and less than USD 10,000 from Wright Medical Technology, Inc. One of the authors certifies that he (RJS), or a member of his immediate family, has received or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,000 from Biomet Inc. 123Clin Orthop Relat Res (2015) 473:2031-2041 DOI 10.1007 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® the three implant types, demonstrating the following probabilities of most effective implant with 95% credible intervals (CrI): CoC = 64.6% (0%-100%); CoPxl = 24.9% (0%-100%); and MoPxl = 9.9% (0%-100%). The CrIs ranged from 0% to 100% for all three bearing surfaces. Direct-comparison meta-analysis allowed for pooling of five RCTs, including 779 THAs, whereas network metaanalysis (before post hoc analysis) enabled pooling of 18 RCTs, including 2599 THAs. Conclusions Current published evidence does not support survivorship differences among commonly used bearing surfaces in patients younger than age 65 years undergoing THA at short-to mid-term followup. Long-term RCT data will be needed to determine if a survivorship benefit is realized in younger, more active patients over time. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® neither advocates nor endorses the use of any treatment, drug, or device. Readers are encouraged to always seek additional information, including FDA approval status, of any drug or device before clinical use. Each author certifies that his institution approved the human protocol for this investigation, that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.