Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 9/2023

Open Access 15.02.2023 | Knee Arthroplasty

Clinical effects of interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee block with multimodal analgesia for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Yongjie Qiao, Feng Li, Lvdan Zhang, Xiaoyang Song, Xinyuan Yu, Wenbin Yang, Shenghu Zhou, Haoqiang Zhang

Erschienen in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Ausgabe 9/2023

Abstract

Purpose

Combination of regional anaesthesia technique that is most effective in analgesia and postoperative functional outcome with the fewest complications needs investigation. Interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee block (IPACK) has been introduced clinically. We evaluated the efficacy of IPACK in combination with other nerve blocks after total knee arthroplasty.

Methods

Data were obtained from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Sciencedirect. Studies that compared outcomes using IPACK combined with other regional nerve blocks after total knee arthroplasty with other analgesic modalities and those which used pain scores or opioid consumption as primary or secondary outcomes were included.

Results

Seventeen articles (20 trials, 1652 patients) were included. IPACK supplementation significantly reduced rest pain scores after total knee arthroplasty at postoperative hours 8–12(95%CI − 0.85 [− 1.36, − 0.34], I2 = 94%, p = 0.001), postoperative day 1 (95% CI − 0.49 [− 0.85, − 0.14], I2 = 87%, p = 0.006), and postoperative day 2 (95% CI − 0.28 [− 0.51, -0.05], I2 = 72%, p = 0.02); there was no significant difference at postoperative day 3 or discharge (95% CI − 0.14 [− 0.33, 0.05], I2 = 0%, p = 0.14). Combination treatment resulted in reduced dynamic pain scores at postoperative hours 8–12 (95%CI − 0.52 [− 0.92, − 0.12], I2 = 86%, p = 0.01) and postoperative day 1(95% CI − 0.49 [− 0.87, − 0.11], I2 = 88%, p = 0.01). There was no difference between postoperative day 2(95% CI − 0.29 [− 0.63, 0.05], I2 = 80%, p = 0.09), postoperative day 3 or discharge (95% CI − 0.45 [− 0.92, 0.02], I2 = 83%, p = 0.06). In addition, it strongly reduced postoperative opioid consumption within 24 H (95% CI − 0.76 [− 1.13, − 0.39], I2 = 85%, p < 0.00001), 24–48 H (95% CI − 0.43 [− 0.85, − 0.01], I2 = 83%, p = 0.04), and total opioid use (95% CI − 0.64 [− 1.07, − 0.22], I2 = 86%, p = 0.003). Although IPACK supplementation improved timed up and go test and walking distance at postoperative day 2, there was no statistically significant difference at other time periods or obvious improvement in knee range of motion and quadriceps strength. IPACK block supplementation could shorten the length of stay (LOS) (95% CI − 0.40 [− 0.64, − 0.15], I2 = 70%, p = 0.001) and improve patient satisfaction (95% CI 0.43 [0.01, 0.84], I2 = 87%, p = 0.04).

Conclusion

Based on these results, IPACK supplementation, in addition to standard postoperative analgesia, can be used effectively and safely to relieve early postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty.
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00402-023-04798-x.
Yongjie Qiao and Feng Li have contributed equally to this work and should be considered as equal first authors.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Abkürzungen
TKA
Total knee arthroplasty
IPACK
Interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee
POD
Postoperative day
POH
Postoperative hour(s)
LOS
Length of stay
ACB
Adductor canal block
PAI
Periarticular injections
CACB
Continuous adductor canal block
FTB
Femoral triangle block
LFCNB
Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block
SPANK
Sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee
AFCNB
Anterior femoral cutaneous nerve block
RCT
Randomized control trial
VAS
Visual analog scale
NRS
Numerical rating scale
TUG
Timed up and go test
ROM
Range of movement
WMD
Weighted mean difference
SMD
Standardized mean difference
CI
Confidence interval

Introduction

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most utilized and successful procedures available to resolve end-stage knee disease and can significantly improve patients’ quality of life and knee function postoperatively. With progressive global aging, the annual worldwide rate of TKA has increased steadily over the past 2 decades [2]. However, TKA is one of the most painful procedures; therefore, adequate analgesia is a priority for orthopaedic surgeons [40]. Severe pain can prolong hospital stays, reduce patient satisfaction, and increase opioid consumption, which in turn, triggers gastrointestinal problems, cognitive dysfunction, urinary retention, pruritus, and respiratory depression. Additional complications, such as myocardial infarction and lower extremity deep vein thrombosis, may occur [10]. Adequate analgesia after TKA not only improves patient satisfaction, but also provides the foundation for postoperative functional recovery and joint mobility. Additionally, it can effectively prevent the development of chronic pain, especially for those at risk thereof. The concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) was first introduced in 1997 by Kehlet [18], which has gradually been applied and matured in the field of orthopaedics. Regional anaesthesia (RA) could contribute further to effective analgesia for TKA and provide early functional recovery to the greatest extent possible. Therefore, RA for TKA is one of the recommended interventions in the ERAS protocol [21]. The use of multimodal analgesia should be encouraged because it not only improves joint activity, but also promotes early painless joint movement and recovery after undergoing TKA.
The complex innervation of the knee joint includes the femoral, common peroneal, anterior saphenous, tibial, and posterior obturator nerves; these serve as important targets in postoperative analgesia after TKA [30]. Subsequently, multiple regional anaesthetic modalities are often required to provide adequate postoperative analgesia. Targeting the femoral, sciatic, iliac fascia and other nerves using regional nerve blocks can achieve satisfactory early postoperative analgesia to some extent with fewer side effects than opioids; however, there is concern for the risk of potential postoperative falls due to muscular weakness, foot drop, and masking of surgically-induced peroneal nerve injury [5]. Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) does not affect the patient's movement yet does not achieve satisfactory analgesia. The adductor canal block (ACB) can provide comparable anterior knee analgesia similar to that of the femoral nerve block and preserves the main motor branch of the femoral nerve, thus maintaining balance and quadriceps strength. Complications due to poor muscle strength are avoided, however, this approach does effectively address posterior knee pain [5, 19]. Contrastingly, IPACK can provide more satisfactory posterior and lateral knee analgesia in patients after TKA, while preserving the motor function of the common peroneal nerve and tibial nerve by blocking the sensory nerve [1, 5].
Ultrasound-guided IPACK, a new regional analgesic technique, is believed to relieve posterior knee pain after TKA by targeting the articular branches which innervate the posterior aspect of the knee joint [36]. Hence, IPACK is gradually being used clinically. Whether adding IPACK to the multimodal analgesic regimen can further improve the analgesic effect after TKA needs investigation [13, 22]. There are various regional anaesthesia techniques; it is unclear which combination is the most effective in terms of analgesia and postoperative functional outcomes in nerve blocks with the fewest complications. We aimed to summarize all the RCTs and prospective studies recently published on IPACK for postoperative analgesia after TKA, and to compare the IPACK with or without other nerve blocks and other analgesic methods (FNB, ACB, LIA, etc.). Furthermore, we sought to evaluate its status and value in perioperative management after TKA, by evaluating its impact on postoperative drug use, joint mobility, patient satisfaction, joint function scores and safety profile.

Main text

Systematic review

This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We performed a systematic search of various electronic databases (i.e.: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Sciencedirect) for relevant articles from inception to July 20, 2022, without language and date restrictions. Broad MeSH terms and Boolean operators were selected for each database search; the following search terms were used: (total knee replacement OR total knee arthroplasty OR TKR OR TKA) AND (IPACK OR interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee) AND (random OR prospective OR blind).
Inclusion criteria: All RCTs and prospective studies that compared outcomes using IPACK combined with other regional nerve blocks after TKA compared with other analgesic modalities were included. Studies with pain scores or opioid consumption as primary or secondary outcomes were also included. Exclusion criteria: Non-peer reviewed publications, certain study designs (observational studies, case reports, case series, review articles, letters to the editor), and non-human trials were excluded. Two authors independently selected abstracts as well as full-text articles from the above listed databases using the aforementioned search strategies, and a third author adjudicated discrepancies. The article selection process is illustrated in Fig. 1.

Data extraction and analysis

The following data were extracted: (1) demographic and clinical information of the patients(including age, number of IPACK cases, number of control cases; (2) visual analog scale (VAS) or numerical rating scale (NRS) scores for rest and dynamic status at PO hours 8–12, POD1, 2, 3, and discharge; (3) opioid consumption at 24 h, 24–48 h, and total opioid consumption; (4) LOS and patient satisfaction; (5) TUG, walking distance, ROM, and quadriceps strength; (6) location of IPACK (proximal or distal); (7) anaesthetic doses for IPACK and other nerve blocks; (8) other nerve blocking methods; and (9) complications. Images and tables in the text were evaluated and analysed in order to extract the required data. For each included study, two reviewers extracted all relevant data independently, and any disagreement was resolved by a third reviewer.

Quality of evidence and risk of bias assessment

The quality of evidence and risk of bias for all RCT trials were assessed for methodological quality using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool by two of the researchers. Any disagreements were adjudicated by a third researcher. Risk of bias was graded as low, high, or unclear as represented in Fig. 2 as follows: green circle, low risk of bias; red circle, high risk of bias; yellow circle, unclear risk of bias. RCTs are considered high-quality literature; however, the level of evidence may be downgraded due to risk of bias, variability, imprecision, and publication bias. The risks of bias are presented in the Fig. 2.

Statistical analysis

All analyses were conducted using the Stata software (RevMan version 5.3.5, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark). The continuous variable median (and interquartile range (IQR)) was estimated by the method described by McGrath et al. [26], and converted into mean ± standard deviation (SD) for inclusion in the statistical analysis. The data was expressed as weighted or standardized mean difference (WMD or SMD). We calculated the I2 coefficient to assess heterogeneity with the following predetermined limits: low < 50%, moderate 50–74%, and high > 75%; and P ≥ 0.05 and I2 < 50% indicating no statistical heterogeneity between studies. A random-effects model was applied in circumstances of moderate or high heterogeneity; otherwise, a fixed-effects model was employed. If there was significant heterogeneity in the included RCTs, such data were considered unsuitable.

Results

A total of 17 publications with 1652 patients were included [1, 9, 1517, 19, 20, 22, 23, 27, 28, 3133, 35, 37, 41, 43], consisting of 16 RCTs and one prospective control trial. The trial characteristics are represented in Table 1. All studies investigated the analgesic efficacy of IPACK in patients undergoing TKA only.
Table 1
Trial characteristics
First author et al., year, study type
Group (N)
Gender (M/F)
Age (mean)
Local anesthetic used
IPACK location
Intraop anesthesia
Preop analgesia
Postop MMA
Outcome measures
Sankineani et al. [35], 2018, prospective control trial
IPACK + ACB
(60)
38/22
66.6
15 ml 0.2% ropiv (IPACK)
20 ml 0.2% ropiv (ACB)
Proximal
Spinal
Celecoxib 200 mg
Gabapentin 300 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
ROM
Walking distance
ACB
(60)
42/18
63.3
Kim et al. [20], 2018, RCT
IPACK + ACB + PAI
(43)
20/23
63.8
25 ml 0.25% bupiv (IPACK)
15 ml 0.25% bupiv (ACB)
30 ml 0.25% bupiv w/epi (deep PAI)
20 ml 0.25% bupiv (superficial PAI)
30 ml 0.5% bupiv w/epi (deep PAI)
20 ml 0.25% bupiv (superficial PAI)
Proximal
Spinal
Meloxicam 15 mg
(7.5 mg, age > 75)
Oxycodone 10 mg
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use
Walking distance
Satisfaction
PAI
(43)
13/30
67.1
Patterson et al. [33], 2020, RCT
IPAC + CACB
(35)
14/21
67
(median)
20 ml 0.25% ropiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.25% ropiv w/epi + 8 ml/h 0.2% ropiv for 48 h (CACB)
2 ml 0.9% saline (sham + IPACK)
Proximal
General and spinal
Pregabalin 150 mg
(75 mg, age > 70)
Yes
VAS pain score
Opioid use
Walking distance LOS
CAC + 
sham IPACK
(34)
13/21
68
(median)
Kampitak et al. [15], 2020 (1), RCT
IPACK + CACB
(33)
7/26
68.6
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (IPACK)
15 ml 0.25% levobupiv + 5 ml/h 0.15% levobupiv (CACB)
15 ml 0.25% levobupiv (TNB)
Proximal
Spinal
Paracetamol 650 mg
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
LOS
Quadriceps strength
Satisfaction
CACB + TNB
(32)
4/28
68.8
Kampitak et al. [15], 2020 (2), RCT
IPACK + CACB
(33)
6/27
69.9
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (IPACK)
15 ml 0.25% levobupiv + 5 ml/h 0.15% levobupiv (cACB)
15 ml 0.25% levobupiv (TNB)
Distal
Spinal
Paracetamol 650 mg
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
LOS
Quadriceps strength
Satisfaction
CACB + TNB
(32)
4/28
68.6
Li et al. [22], 2020 (1), RCT
IPACK + ACB + LFCNB
(50)
17/33
66.3
20 ml 0.2% ropiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.2% ropiv w/epi (ACB)
10 ml 0.2% ropiv w/epi (LFCNB)
Distal
General
Loxoprofen 60 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
ROM
TUG
LOS
Walking distance
Quadriceps strength
ACB + LFCNB
(50)
18/32
66.4
Li et al. [22], 2020 (2), RCT
IPACK + ACB
(50)
10/40
66.8
20 ml 0.2% ropiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.2% ropiv w/epi (ACB)
Distal
General
Loxoprofen 60 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
ROM
TUG
LOS
Walking distance
Quadriceps strength
ACB
(50)
19/31
65.6
Kertkiatkachorn et al. [19], 2020, RCT
IPACK + ACB + postoperative CACB + sham PAI
(34)
29/4
70.6
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (ACB)
5 ml/h 0.15% levobupiv for 60 h (postoperative CACB)
80 ml 0.125% levobupiv w/epi (PAI)
20 ml 0.9% saline (sham IPACK)
80 ml 0.9% saline (sham PAI)
20 ml 0.9% saline (sham ACB)
Distal
Spinal
Acetaminophen 750 mg
celecoxib 400 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
LOS Satisfaction
Quadriceps strength
PAI + postoperative CACB + sham IPACK + sham ACB
(35)
29/5
68.7
Vichainarong et al. [41], 2020, RCT
IPACK + CACB + PAI
(33)
4/29
70.7
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv + 5 ml/h 0.15% levobupiv for 60 h (CACB)
80 ml 0.125% levobupiv w/epi (PAI)
5 ml 0.9% saline (sham IPACK)
Distal
Spinal
Acetaminophen 650 mg
celecoxib 400 mg
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
LOS Satisfactio
Quadriceps strength
CACB + PAI + sham IPACK
(32)
5/27
68.7
Ochroch et al. [31], 2020, RCT
IPACK + CACB
(60)
26/34
67.7
20 ml 0.5% ropiv (IPACK)
18 ml 0.5% ropiv + 8 ml/h 0.2% ropiv for 48 h (CACB)
Distal
General and spinal
Acetaminophen 1000 mg
gabapentin 300 mg
celecoxib 200 mg
Yes
APS-POQ-R pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
Walking distance
Satisfaction
CACB + sham IPACK
(59)
24/35
65.6
Tak et al. [37], 2020, RCT
IPACK + ACB
(56)
27/29
65.5
20 ml 0.2% ropiv (IPACK)
20 ml 0.2% ropiv (ACB)
Proximal
Spinal
Celecoxib 200 mg
gabapentin 300 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
Walking distance
ACB
(58)
21/37
64.1
Kampitak et al. [17], 2021, RCT
IPACK + ACB + AFCNB + sham PAI
(34)
2/32
70.0
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (ACB)
20 ml 0.25% levobupiv w/epi (AFCNB)
80 ml 0.1875% levobupiv w/epi (PAI)
80 ml 0.9% saline (sham PAI)
20 ml 0.9% saline (sham IPACK)
20 ml 0.9% saline (sham ACB)
20 ml 0.9% saline (sham AFCNB)
Distal
Spinal
Acetaminophen 650 mg
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use
ROM
LOS
Satisfaction
PAI + sham IPACK + sham ACB + sham AFCNB
(34)
1/33
73.2
Narejo et al. [28], 2021, RCT
IPACK + ACB
(40)
10/30
64.3
20 ml 0.25% bupiv (IPACK)
20 ml 0.25% bupiv (ACB)
60 ml 0.167% bupiv w/epi (PAI)
Distal
Spinal
NA
Yes
NRS pain scores
TUG
ROM
LOS
PAI + ACB
(40)
7/33
64.2
Mou et al. [27], 2021, RCT
IPACK + ACB
(40)
8/32
64.4
20 ml 0.25% ropiv w/epi (IPACK)
20 ml 0.25% ropiv w/epi (ACB)
20 ml 0.9% saline (sham IPACK)
Distal
General
Celecoxib 200 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
Quadriceps strength
ACB + sham IPACK
(40)
6/34
66.4
Padhy et al. [32], 2021, RCT
IPACK + ACB
(41)
23/18
62.6
15 ml 0.25% ropiv (IPACK)
15 ml 0.25% ropiv (ACB)
15 ml 0.25% ropiv (SPANK)
Proximal
Spinal
NA
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use Satisfaction
Quadriceps strength
ACB + SPANK
(41)
22/19
64.5
Li et al. [23], 2021, RCT
IPACK + FTB
(40)
15/25
67.8
20 ml 0.3% ropiv w/morphine (IPACK)
10 ml 0.3% ropiv w/morphine (FTB)
100 ml. 0.15% ropiv w/morphine (PAI)
Distal
General
Celecoxib 200 mg
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
ROM
LOS
Quadriceps strength
PAI
(40)
18/22
70.8
Abdullah et al. [1], 2022, RCT
IPACK + ACB
(40)
19/21
60.1
30 mL 0.25% bupiv (IPACK)
20 mL 0.25% bupiv (ACB)
Proximal
Spinal
NA
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
Quadriceps strength
Satisfaction
ACB
(40)
16/24
60.8
Et et al. [9], 2022 (1), RCT
IPACK + ACB
(35)
12/23
68.5
20 ml 0.25% bupiv (IPACK)
20 ml 0.5% bupiv (ACB)
40 ml 0.25% bupiv w/morphine (PAI)
Distal
Spinal
acetaminophen 1000 mg
Diclofenac sodium 75 mg
Yes
NRS pain score
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
LOS
Satisfaction
ACB + PAI
(35)
14/21
71.1
Et et al. [9], 2022 (2), RCT
IPACK + ACB
(35)
12/23
68.5
20 ml 0.25% bupiv (IPACK)
20 ml 0.5% bupiv (ACB)
Distal
Spinal
acetaminophen 1000 mg
Diclofenac sodium 75 mg
Yes
NRS pain scores
Opioid use
TUG
ROM
LOS
Satisfaction
ACB
(35)
16/19
67.1
Wang et al. [43], 2022, RCT
IPACK + CACB
(35)
7/28
66.5
20 ml 0.25% ropiv w/epi (IPACK)
15 ml 0.5% ropiv + 5 ml/h 0.2% ropiv for 72 h (CACB)
0.9% saline subcutaneously (sham IPACK)
Distal
General
NA
Yes
VAS pain scores
Opioid use
ROM
Walking distance
Satisfaction
CACB + sham IPACK
(35)
6/29
64.2
N number; M male; F female; MMA multimodal analgesia; IPACK interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee block; ACB adductor canal block; PAI periarticular injections; CACB continuous adductor canal block; FTB femoral triangle block; LFCNB lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block; SPANK sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee; AFCNB anterior femoral cutaneous nerve block; RCT randomized control trial; VAS visual analog scale; NRS numerical rating scale; TUG timed up and go test; ROM range of movement; LOS length of stay; ropiv ropivacaine; bupiv bupivacaine; levobupiv levobupivacaine; w/epi with epinephrine

Rest pain scores

Twelve studies (n = 1154) reported on the total rest pain scores after TKA with IPACK supplementation [19, 20, 22, 23, 27, 3133, 35, 37, 41, 43]. When compared with a control group, IPACK supplementation was found to reduce rest pain scores at 8–12 h postoperatively, with a mean difference (95% CI − 0.85 [− 1.36, − 0.34], I2 = 94%, p = 0.001) as well as POD1 (95% CI − 0.49 [− 0.85, − 0.14], I2 = 87%, p = 0.006), and POD2 (95% CI − 0.28 [− 0.51, − 0.05], I2 = 72%, p = 0.02);. However, rest pain scores on POD3 or discharge (95% CI − 0.14 [− 0.33, 0.05], I2 = 0%, p = 0.14) did not achieve statistical significance (Fig. 3, Table 2).
Table 2
Primary outcomes of TKA with IPACK block supplementation
Outcomes
Number of trials
Total number of participants
WMD or SMD, [95% CI]
p value for overall effect
Heterogeneity
Model
Tau2
χ2
I2 (%)
IPACK
Control
Rest pain scores at specific time points
 POH 8–12
12
542
543
 − 0.85 [− 1.36, − 0.34]
0.001
0.76
172.01
94
Random
 POD1
12
517
518
 − 0.49 [− 0.85, − 0.14]
0.006
0.34
84.79
87
Random
 POD2
12
523
533
 − 0.28 [− 0.51, − 0.05]
0.02
0.12
38.60
72
Random
 POD3 or discharge
5
215
215
 − 0.14 [− 0.33, 0.05]
0.14
NA
3.98
0
Fixed
Dynamic pain scores at specific time points
 POH 8–12
9
366
366
 − 0.52 [− 0.92, − 0.12]
0.01
0.32
56.20
86
Random
 POD1
12
495
493
 − 0.49 [− 0.87, − 0.11]
0.01
0.40
94.41
88
Random
 POD2
9
347
356
 − 0.29 [− 0.63, 0.05]
0.09
0.21
40.00
80
Random
 POD3 or discharge
5
215
215
 − 0.45 [− 0.92, 0.02]
0.06
0.24
23.30
83
Random
Opioid consumption
 Within 24 h
10
402
400
 − 0.76 [− 1.13, − 0.39]
 < 0.00001
0.30
58.13
85
Random
 24–48 h
7
274
273
 − 0.43 [− 0.85, − 0.01]
0.04
0.26
34.89
83
Random
 Total opioid consumption
8
341
343
 − 0.64 [− 1.07, − 0.22]
0.003
0.32
51.16
86
Random
POH postoperative hour(s); POD postoperative day; IPACK interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee block; TKA total knee arthroplasty; WMD weighted mean difference; SMD standardized mean difference; CI confidence interval

Dynamic pain scores

Eleven studies (n = 988) were summarized regarding dynamic pain scores after TKA with IPACK supplementation [17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 27, 3133, 41, 43]. The meta-analysis firmly indicated the analgesic benefit of IPACK at 8–12 h postoperatively (95% CI − 0.52 [− 0.92, − 0.12], I2 = 86%, p = 0.01) and POD1 (95% CI − 0.49 [− 0.87, − 0.11], I2 = 88%, p = 0.01) compared with a control group; however, the results in favour thereof on POD2 (95% CI − 0.29 [− 0.63, 0.05], I2 = 80%, p = 0.09) and POD3 or discharge (95% CI − 0.45 [− 0.92, 0.02], I2 = 83%, p = 0.06) with IPACK supplementation, did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference between studies (Fig. 4, Table 2).

Opioid consumption

A total of ten studies (n = 1066) characterized postoperative opioid consumption after TKA with IPACK supplementation [1, 9, 20, 22, 27, 32, 33, 37, 41, 43], which demonstrated a significant reduction in postoperative opioid consumption at 24 h (95% CI − 0.76 [− 1.13, − 0.39], I2 = 85%, p < 0.00001) and 24–48 h (95% CI − 0.43 [− 0.85, − 0.01], I2 = 83%, p = 0.04); and total opioid use (95% CI − 0.64 [− 1.07, − 0.22], I2 = 86%, p = 0.003) (Fig. 5, Table 2).

Length of stay and satisfaction

Data from 11 studies (n = 901) described the LOS, and 10 studies (n = 747) described patient satisfaction after TKA with IPACK supplementation, respectively [9, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 28, 31, 33, 41, 43]. The research strongly confirmed that it could shorten LOS (95% CI − 0.40 [− 0.64, − 0.15], I2 = 70%, p = 0.001) and improve patient satisfaction (95% CI 0.43 [0.01, 0.84], I2 = 87%, p = 0.04) (Figs. 6 and 7).

Physical examinations findings and complications

Although IPACK supplementation improved TUG and walking distance at POD2, there was no statistically significant difference at other time points (Table 3), nor an obvious advantage in ROM of the knee and quadriceps strength at any time points (Table 2). Among the complications assessed by the included trials, no statistically significant differences were found (Table 3).
Table 3
Secondary outcomes of TKA with IPACK block supplementation
Outcome
Number of trials
Total number of participants
WMD or SMD [95% CI]
p value for overall effect
Heterogeneity
Model
Tau2
χ2
I2 (%)
IPACK
Control
TUG test at specific time points
 POD1
10
380
376
 − 0.08 [− 0.22, 0.07]
0.30
NA
16.21
44
Fixed
 POD2
9
345
343
 − 0.24 [− 0.39, − 0.09]
0.002
NA
12.28
35
Fixed
 POD3 or discharge
6
262
260
 − 0.06 [− 0.24, 0.11]
0.48
NA
7.8
36
Fixed
ROM at specific time points
 POD1
11
419
418
2.28 [− 0.06, 4.62]
0.06
8.99
27.57
64
Random
 POD2
12
479
478
2.80 [− 0.54, 6.14]
0.10
29.07
82.89
87
Random
 POD3 or discharge
8
337
337
1.63 [− 1.79, 5.06]
0.35
20.68
55.76
87
Random
Walking distance at specific time points
 POD1
6
272
270
0.08 [− 0.09, 0.25]
0.34
NA
7.63
34
Fixed
 POD2
6
280
283
0.24 [0.07, 0.41]
0.005
NA
8.86
42
Fixed
 POD3 or discharge
4
195
195
0.29 [− 0.10, 0.67]
0.15
0.11
11.09
73
Random
Quadriceps strength at specific time points
 POD1
8
310
305
0.05 [− 0.13, 0.23]
0.60
0.03
17.00
59
Random
 POD2
7
269
265
0.08 [− 0.12, 0.28]
0.43
0.04
17.06
65
Random
 POD3 or discharge
5
195
190
0.06 [− 0.25, 0.37]
0.69
0.08
36.63
89
Random
 LOS
12
452
449
 − 0.40 [− 0.64, − 0.15]
0.001
0.13
36.92
70
Random
 Satisfaction
10
375
372
0.43 [0.01, 0.84]
0.04
0.39
69.27
87
Random
POH postoperative hour(s); POD postoperative day; IPACK interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee block; TKA total knee arthroplasty; WMD weighted mean difference; SMD standardized mean difference; CI confidence interval

Discussion

Considering the changing healthcare environment that emphasizes early activity and discharge after TKA, we aimed to determine whether using IPACK combined with other nerve blocks for patients after TKA allows early activity and reduces LOS while providing adequate pain relief. We found that IPACK combined with other nerve blocks could effectively relieve early pain (within 2 days after surgery) in patients after TKA, particularly rest pain at 8–12 h postoperatively, yet there was no statistically significant difference at POD3 or discharge. Dynamic pain scores at 8–12 h PO and POD1 demonstrated statistically significant differences, but none at POD2, POD3 or discharge. There were differences in opioid consumption with IPACK combined with other nerve blocks at 24–48 h PO, especially within 24 h PO. Moreover, total opioid consumption was shown to differ significantly between groups. Additionally, IPACK combined with other nerve blocks could shorten LOS and improve patient satisfaction. Interestingly, the TUG and walking distance were statistically different at POD2 but not at other time points. In our study, the ROM, quadriceps strength and complications did not correlate significantly with the addition of IPACK.
Postoperative TKA pain affects patients' functional recovery and can cause patients to refuse surgery due to fear. Therefore, better pain control after TKA is a priority for orthopaedists. Recently, ERAS and multimodal analgesia have contributed greatly to postoperative analgesia after TKA. There is an urgent need for new analgesic models which reduce complications and postoperative analgesia usage without affecting postoperative muscle strength. Compared to epidural analgesia, periarticular injections, and peripheral nerve blocks (PNB), such as the adductor canal (ACB) and saphenous nerve blocks (SNB), are widely accepted and used in multimodal analgesic protocols due to their ability to reduce opioid consumption and motor protection in patients undergoing TKA. These nerve blocks provide similar analgesia to epidural analgesia, with improved mobility and fewer complications, such as lower blood pressure and urinary retention [11, 34].
Femoral and sciatic nerve blocks are considered effective in relieving postoperative pain immediately after primary TKA and have been shown to reduce opioid use [5, 38]. However, mobility remains affected until the block wears off, which is detrimental to the patient's early functional rehabilitation of the knee. Moreover, periarticular injection and peripheral nerve block cannot achieve effective analgesia due to incomplete blockade, especially of the posterior aspect of the knee joint [19, 35]. There was no clear difference in the analgesic effect of ACB compared with FNB; likely, as most nerves in the adductor canal are sensory nerves that innervate the knee joint. FNB decreases quadriceps strength and causes corresponding complications [5, 42]. It is encouraging that IPACK has been gradually applied to analgesia after TKA in recent years, with good results [8, 20].
Ultrasound-guided IPACK targets the branching nerves which innervate the posterior aspect of the knee joint. However, the extent of injection spread and the number of affected branches remains unknown. A cadaveric study showed that latex injections spread to the middle knee artery, which usually accompanies the articular branch of the tibial nerve [29]. Another study compared the distribution of methylene blue in the proximal versus distal approach by performing an ultrasound-guided IPACK, which resulted in the nerves of the anterior external capsule of the knee joint, the anterior branch of the common peroneal nerve, the superior lateral knee nerve and the posterior capsule of the joint becoming more easily stained [39]. These studies showed that after IPACK blockade, the drug spreads to the articular branches of the common peroneal and tibial nerves, and obturator nerve, which are responsible for innervating the posterior knee capsule.
When performing posterior capsule release, TKA can cause posterior knee pain due to popliteal soft tissue debridement and cyst excision. As a result, substantial pain occurs, which is usually most intense within 24 h of a TKA and can lead to a variety of complications [12]. This study shows that IPACK + ACB greatly improved pain within 48 h after TKA compared to ACB alone; ROM on postoperative POD 2 and walking distance on POD 3 also increased, but not all functional outcomes improved [35, 37]. A RCT found that adding IPACK and ACB to periarticular injection (PAI) improved analgesia after TKA compared to PAI alone and can effectively reduce dynamic and rest NRS pain scores at POD 1 [20]. Another study showed that ACB + IPACK reduced pain within 8 h postoperatively compared with ACB alone; however, the small statistical benefit of adding IPACK to ACB is unlikely to be clinically significant [27]. Similarly, a study concluded that the IPACK + ACB group had significantly lower dynamic NRS scores at 48 h postoperatively than the PAI + ACB and ACB groups and can effectively reduce opioid consumption [9]. Another study also showed ACB + IPACK offers better analgesia, less opioid consumption and better patient satisfaction with comparable rehabilitation parameters in the immediate postoperative period after TKA, compared to ACB with sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee (SPANK) block [32]. Furthermore, receiving ACB + IPACK and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (LFCNB) had a longer analgesic effect than ACB combined with IPACK, ACB combined with LFNCB and ACB only [22]. It has also been shown that the IPACK alone only reduces the incidence of posterior knee pain at 6 h postoperatively but is less effective for anterolateral pain [31]. In contrast to these results, IPACK + LIA + continuous adductor canal block (CACB) did not result in better analgesia than LIA + CACB [41]. The results of this study showed that IPACK combined with other nerve blocks was effective in relieving early pain in patients after TKA, which supports the use of IPACK blockade supplementation with ACB as a motion-preserving RA technique in knee surgery, resulting in better levels of analgesia.
The goal of postoperative rehabilitation after TKA is optimal pain control with minimal opioid requirements, and better motor function preservation. Although opioids can be used for severe pain and are commonly used for analgesia after TKA, long-term opioid use may increase the risk of TKA revision in the first year and predisposes to more complications, such as nausea and vomiting [3]. Additional concerns about substance abuse and addiction, with an emphasis on reducing postoperative opioid consumption, are particularly important for patients undergoing TKA. Femoral Triangle Block (FTB) + IPACK provided excellent early postoperative analgesia and significantly reduced morphine and narcotic dosage compared to FTB block alone [23]. A study found that IPACK + ACB largely reduced postoperative opioid consumption compared to ACB alone [1]. Similarly, Kim et al. also found that IPACK + ACB + PAI resulted in less opioid use after surgery (p = 0.005, POD 0), less intravenous opioid use (p < 0.001), and less need for intravenous self-administered analgesia (p = 0.037) compared with PAI alone [20]. Furthermore, a RCT showed that IPACK alone, compared with ACB, and ACB + IPACK, was associated with the highest opioid consumption within 24 h postoperatively and during hospitalization [27]. Interestingly, a prospective study found that patients given IPACK + ACBs may require more opioids and have poorer immediate functional performance compared to PAI alone [19]; this may be related to the small sample size of this particular study and the operating technique of the anaesthesiologist. The abovementioned nerve block methods (ACB, FNB, and PAI) only blocked the sensory nerves, while the motor nerves may overlap with some of the sensory nerves and still play a role in pain. Using a large sample, the results of this meta-analysis showed that IPACK combined with other regional nerve blocks greatly reduced opioid use in the early and total postoperative period after TKA; therefore, IPACK is a very promising nerve block for postoperative analgesia after TKA.
Several studies have also shown that IPACK combined with other multimodal analgesic methods can shorten LOS in TKA patients [8, 9, 41]. Similarly, studies have shown that IPACK increases the proportion of patients discharged at POD 3, possibly due to the absence of plantar numbness and the preservation of plantar flexor muscle strength [15]. However, there is no conclusive evidence that PNB can clearly shorten LOS compared to other analgesic modalities. The LOS after TKA depends on a variety of factors, including the patient's health status, ability to walk safely, overall pain control, and the patient's psychosocial circumstances. The combination of IPACK with other nerve blocks in this study remarkably reduced the LOS, which to some extent, supports the use of IPACK for analgesia after TKA. Furthermore, better postoperative analgesia, ambulation, ROM, and minimal opioid consumption and complications all improve patient satisfaction. Therefore, if the above problems are adequately addressed, patients will have greater levels of satisfaction. Previous studies have found that patients who received IPACK-inclusive analgesia demonstrated good postoperative analgesia, less opioid consumption, better ambulation, and ROM, resulting in higher patient satisfaction [20, 32]. Patient satisfaction was higher in the majority of studies with the addition of IPACK, and the results of this meta-analysis showed that the addition of IPACK improved patient satisfaction remarkably well.
Our study compared the analgesic effects of proximal and distal IPACK techniques after TKA and showed no visible difference between them. However, it is possible that the effects obtained with proximal and distal IPACKs are different, and there is uncertainty about the clinical outcome due to improper selection of the optimal block site. A cadaver study showed that the dispersion of injectables in cadavers may differ from clinical practice due to differences in tissue structure and the nature of the injectables [6]. Other factors, such as the patient's muscle contraction, patient's position, anatomical changes, needle direction and injection pressure may also affect the drug diffusion, which may also affect the analgesic effect [4]. Surprisingly, a study found that injections at or just above the level of the femoral condyle (distal technique) were more advantageous in relieving posterior knee pain [17]. Moreover, the effects may vary depending on the concentration and dose of the injected drug. However, a study showed that even if the concentration and dose of local anaesthetic drugs are lowered in peripheral nerve blocks, they remain effective, while increasing the concentration and dose increases the risk of systemic drug toxicity [24]. Therefore, the optimal block site, drug concentration and dose in the IPACK block still needs to be investigated.
Adductor canal block or CACB, combined with IPACK, significantly lowered pain scores within 5 days after surgery compared with ACB or CACB combined with LFA; CACB clearly alleviated pain at 2 weeks and 1 month after surgery [14]. Mariano also showed in a study that continuous regional anaesthetic techniques are preferable to single-injection regional anaesthetic techniques with CACB alone producing continuous analgesia and potentially reducing rebound pain [25]. However, CACB also has related disadvantages, such as follow-up requiring training, increased expenditure of medical resources, and catheter position changes and blockages [7].
In conclusion, it is very important to study the analgesic effect of IPACK after TKA, as it directly affects patient satisfaction and postoperative joint function recovery. The main advantages of IPACK are that it is a promising nerve block method since it provides excellent analgesia and reduces opioid use in combination with other nerve blocks without affecting patient mobility. However, confounding factors in the study must be considered, such as flaws in the study design or analgesic methods that may provide posterior knee coverage. Additionally, other knee surgeries, such as knee cruciate ligament reconstruction and tibial plateau fracture surgery, can be further considered. These studies strongly support the use of IPACK in the multimodal analgesic pathway. Although multimodal analgesia can significantly relieve postoperative pain, preserve motor function, and shorten the LOS, pain reappears with gradual wearing off of the nerve block after discharge, which may increase the probability of readmission analgesia to be required. However, severe rebound pain, hospital readmission due to inadequate pain control, and opioid-related adverse reactions require further development of corresponding protocols, which may lead to the assessment of the feasibility of indwelling catheters in future studies.
This study has its limitations. First, the use of IPACK analgesia combined with other analgesic methods, including ACB, FNB, and CACB; will inevitably have different degrees of heterogeneity which may affect the accuracy of the test results. Second, there is a risk of bias when some articles with low level of evidence are merged. Third, the included studies used general or intraspinal anaesthesia for surgical treatment, which would lead to heterogeneity in the combination. Finally, IPACK, as a newer nerve block method, remains in the exploratory phase in some hospitals, causing further heterogeneity.

Conclusion

With an increasing need for perioperative services to transition toward an ambulatory model with enhanced recovery, early mobilization, and earlier discharge, IPACK blockade supplementation might be a preferable motor-sparing alternative to TNB with a lower incidence of complications and an increased likelihood of earlier discharge from hospital. Supplementation with IPACK blockade has demonstrated great analgesic effects for early postoperative pain control after TKA, compared to patient-controlled epidural analgesia, and similar to PNB. Moreover, it can significantly reduce postoperative opioid consumption, shorten LOS and improve patient satisfaction. Therefore, IPACK block supplementation as a component of an ERAS protocol for patients undergoing TKA could relieve immediate postoperative pain and encourage a return to daily activities.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to all authors who provided information of their studies.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethical approval

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Jetzt e.Med zum Sonderpreis bestellen!

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Jetzt bestellen und 100 € sparen!

e.Med Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Orthopädie & Unfallchirurgie erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen der Fachgebiete, den Premium-Inhalten der dazugehörigen Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

Anhänge

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Abdullah MA, Abu Elyazed MM, Mostafa SF (2022) The interspace between popliteal artery and posterior capsule of the knee (IPACK) block in knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial. Pain Physician 25:E427-e433PubMed Abdullah MA, Abu Elyazed MM, Mostafa SF (2022) The interspace between popliteal artery and posterior capsule of the knee (IPACK) block in knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial. Pain Physician 25:E427-e433PubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Alrawashdeh W, Eschweiler J, Migliorini F, El Mansy Y, Tingart M, Rath B (2021) Effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty rehabilitation programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med 53:jrn00200CrossRef Alrawashdeh W, Eschweiler J, Migliorini F, El Mansy Y, Tingart M, Rath B (2021) Effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty rehabilitation programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med 53:jrn00200CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Ben-Ari A, Chansky H, Rozet I (2017) Preoperative opioid use is associated with early revision after total knee arthroplasty: a study of male patients treated in the veterans affairs system. J Bone Jt Surg Am 99:1–9CrossRef Ben-Ari A, Chansky H, Rozet I (2017) Preoperative opioid use is associated with early revision after total knee arthroplasty: a study of male patients treated in the veterans affairs system. J Bone Jt Surg Am 99:1–9CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Black ND, Stecco C, Chan VWS (2021) Fascial plane blocks: more questions than answers? Anesth Analg 132:899–905CrossRefPubMed Black ND, Stecco C, Chan VWS (2021) Fascial plane blocks: more questions than answers? Anesth Analg 132:899–905CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Chan E, Howle R, Onwochei D, Desai N (2021) Infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK) block in knee surgery: a narrative review. Reg Anesth Pain Med 46:784–805CrossRefPubMed Chan E, Howle R, Onwochei D, Desai N (2021) Infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK) block in knee surgery: a narrative review. Reg Anesth Pain Med 46:784–805CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Chin KJ, El-Boghdadly K (2021) Mechanisms of action of the erector spinae plane (ESP) block: a narrative review. Can J Anaesth 68:387–408CrossRefPubMed Chin KJ, El-Boghdadly K (2021) Mechanisms of action of the erector spinae plane (ESP) block: a narrative review. Can J Anaesth 68:387–408CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Desai N, El-Boghdadly K, Albrecht E (2020) Peripheral nerve blockade and novel analgesic modalities for ambulatory anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 33:760–767CrossRefPubMed Desai N, El-Boghdadly K, Albrecht E (2020) Peripheral nerve blockade and novel analgesic modalities for ambulatory anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 33:760–767CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Eccles CJ, Swiergosz AM, Smith AF, Bhimani SJ, Smith LS, Malkani AL (2021) Decreased opioid consumption and length of stay using an IPACK and adductor canal nerve block following total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 34:705–711CrossRefPubMed Eccles CJ, Swiergosz AM, Smith AF, Bhimani SJ, Smith LS, Malkani AL (2021) Decreased opioid consumption and length of stay using an IPACK and adductor canal nerve block following total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 34:705–711CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Et T, Korkusuz M, Basaran B, Yarimoglu R, Toprak H, Bilge A et al (2022) Comparison of iPACK and periarticular block with adductor block alone after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. J Anesth 36:276–286CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Et T, Korkusuz M, Basaran B, Yarimoglu R, Toprak H, Bilge A et al (2022) Comparison of iPACK and periarticular block with adductor block alone after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. J Anesth 36:276–286CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Gaffney CJ, Pelt CE, Gililland JM, Peters CL (2017) Perioperative pain management in hip and knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am 48:407–419CrossRef Gaffney CJ, Pelt CE, Gililland JM, Peters CL (2017) Perioperative pain management in hip and knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am 48:407–419CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Gandhi HJ, Trivedi LH, Tripathi DC, Dash DM, Khare AM, Gupta MU (2019) A randomized, controlled trial of comparison of a continuous femoral nerve block (CFNB) and continuous epidural infusion (CEI) using 0.2% ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia and knee rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 35:386–389CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gandhi HJ, Trivedi LH, Tripathi DC, Dash DM, Khare AM, Gupta MU (2019) A randomized, controlled trial of comparison of a continuous femoral nerve block (CFNB) and continuous epidural infusion (CEI) using 0.2% ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia and knee rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 35:386–389CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Gerbershagen HJ, Aduckathil S, van Wijck AJ, Peelen LM, Kalkman CJ, Meissner W (2013) Pain intensity on the first day after surgery: a prospective cohort study comparing 179 surgical procedures. Anesthesiology 118:934–944CrossRefPubMed Gerbershagen HJ, Aduckathil S, van Wijck AJ, Peelen LM, Kalkman CJ, Meissner W (2013) Pain intensity on the first day after surgery: a prospective cohort study comparing 179 surgical procedures. Anesthesiology 118:934–944CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Hussain N, Brull R, Sheehy B, Dasu M, Weaver T, Abdallah FW (2021) Does the addition of iPACK to adductor canal block in the presence or absence of periarticular local anesthetic infiltration improve analgesic and functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med 46:713–721CrossRefPubMed Hussain N, Brull R, Sheehy B, Dasu M, Weaver T, Abdallah FW (2021) Does the addition of iPACK to adductor canal block in the presence or absence of periarticular local anesthetic infiltration improve analgesic and functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med 46:713–721CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Jung DW, Shon WY, Seo SS, Kim OG, Lee IS (2020) Comparison of the postoperative analgesic effect for infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee and that of periarticular multimodal drug injection in total knee arthroplasty: retrospective study in the immediate postoperative period. Knee Surg Relat Res 32:1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jung DW, Shon WY, Seo SS, Kim OG, Lee IS (2020) Comparison of the postoperative analgesic effect for infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee and that of periarticular multimodal drug injection in total knee arthroplasty: retrospective study in the immediate postoperative period. Knee Surg Relat Res 32:1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Amarase C (2019) Opioid-sparing analgesia and enhanced recovery after total knee arthroplasty using combined triple nerve blocks with local infiltration analgesia. J Arthroplasty 34:295–302CrossRefPubMed Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Amarase C (2019) Opioid-sparing analgesia and enhanced recovery after total knee arthroplasty using combined triple nerve blocks with local infiltration analgesia. J Arthroplasty 34:295–302CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Tantavisut S (2020) Motor-sparing effect of iPACK (interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee) block versus tibial nerve block after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med 45:267–276CrossRefPubMed Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Tantavisut S (2020) Motor-sparing effect of iPACK (interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee) block versus tibial nerve block after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med 45:267–276CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Cholwattanakul C, Lertteerawattana L, Dowkrajang S (2021) Effect of ultrasound-guided selective sensory nerve blockade of the knee on pain management compared with periarticular injection for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Knee 33:1–10CrossRefPubMed Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Cholwattanakul C, Lertteerawattana L, Dowkrajang S (2021) Effect of ultrasound-guided selective sensory nerve blockade of the knee on pain management compared with periarticular injection for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Knee 33:1–10CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Kehlet H (1997) Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 78:606–617CrossRefPubMed Kehlet H (1997) Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 78:606–617CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Kertkiatkachorn W, Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S (2021) Adductor canal block combined With iPACK (interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee) block vs periarticular injection for analgesia after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized noninferiority trial. J Arthroplasty 36:122-129.e121CrossRefPubMed Kertkiatkachorn W, Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S (2021) Adductor canal block combined With iPACK (interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee) block vs periarticular injection for analgesia after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized noninferiority trial. J Arthroplasty 36:122-129.e121CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim DH, Beathe JC, Lin Y, YaDeau JT, Maalouf DB, Goytizolo E et al (2019) Addition of infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee and adductor canal block to periarticular injection enhances postoperative pain control in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg 129:526–535CrossRefPubMed Kim DH, Beathe JC, Lin Y, YaDeau JT, Maalouf DB, Goytizolo E et al (2019) Addition of infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee and adductor canal block to periarticular injection enhances postoperative pain control in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg 129:526–535CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee HH, Kwon HM, Lee WS, Yang IH, Choi YS, Park KK (2022) Effectiveness of ERAS (enhanced recovery after surgery) protocol via peripheral nerve block for total knee arthroplasty. J Clin Med 11:3354CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lee HH, Kwon HM, Lee WS, Yang IH, Choi YS, Park KK (2022) Effectiveness of ERAS (enhanced recovery after surgery) protocol via peripheral nerve block for total knee arthroplasty. J Clin Med 11:3354CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Li D, Alqwbani M, Wang Q, Liao R, Yang J, Kang P (2020) Efficacy of adductor canal block combined with additional analgesic methods for postoperative analgesia in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study. J Arthroplasty 35:3554–3562CrossRefPubMed Li D, Alqwbani M, Wang Q, Liao R, Yang J, Kang P (2020) Efficacy of adductor canal block combined with additional analgesic methods for postoperative analgesia in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study. J Arthroplasty 35:3554–3562CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Liu Q, Chelly JE, Williams JP, Gold MS (2015) Impact of peripheral nerve block with low dose local anesthetics on analgesia and functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective study. Pain Med (Malden, Mass) 16:998–1006CrossRef Liu Q, Chelly JE, Williams JP, Gold MS (2015) Impact of peripheral nerve block with low dose local anesthetics on analgesia and functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective study. Pain Med (Malden, Mass) 16:998–1006CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Mariano ER, El-Boghdadly K, Ilfeld BM (2021) Using postoperative pain trajectories to define the role of regional analgesia in personalised pain medicine. Anaesthesia 76:165–169CrossRefPubMed Mariano ER, El-Boghdadly K, Ilfeld BM (2021) Using postoperative pain trajectories to define the role of regional analgesia in personalised pain medicine. Anaesthesia 76:165–169CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Mou P, Wang D, Tang XM, Zeng WN, Zeng Y, Yang J et al (2022) Adductor canal block combined with IPACK block for postoperative analgesia and function recovery following total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study. J Arthroplasty 37:259–266CrossRefPubMed Mou P, Wang D, Tang XM, Zeng WN, Zeng Y, Yang J et al (2022) Adductor canal block combined with IPACK block for postoperative analgesia and function recovery following total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study. J Arthroplasty 37:259–266CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Narejo AS, Abdulwahab F, Aqil M, Alsubaie AT, Hazazy HY, Alzahrani T et al (2021) Efficacy of interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (iPACK) block versus periarticular local infiltration analgesia after unilateral total knee arthroplasty: prospective randomized control trial. Saudi Med J 42:1065–1071CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Narejo AS, Abdulwahab F, Aqil M, Alsubaie AT, Hazazy HY, Alzahrani T et al (2021) Efficacy of interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (iPACK) block versus periarticular local infiltration analgesia after unilateral total knee arthroplasty: prospective randomized control trial. Saudi Med J 42:1065–1071CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Niesen AD, Harris DJ, Johnson CS, Stoike DE, Smith HM, Jacob AK et al (2019) Interspace between popliteal artery and posterior capsule of the knee (IPACK) injectate spread: a cadaver study. J Ultrasound Med 38:741–745CrossRefPubMed Niesen AD, Harris DJ, Johnson CS, Stoike DE, Smith HM, Jacob AK et al (2019) Interspace between popliteal artery and posterior capsule of the knee (IPACK) injectate spread: a cadaver study. J Ultrasound Med 38:741–745CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Donnell R, Dolan J (2018) Anaesthesia and analgesia for knee joint arthroplasty. BJA Educ 18:8–15CrossRefPubMed O’Donnell R, Dolan J (2018) Anaesthesia and analgesia for knee joint arthroplasty. BJA Educ 18:8–15CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Ochroch J, Qi V, Badiola I, Grosh T, Cai L, Graff V et al (2020) Analgesic efficacy of adding the IPACK block to a multimodal analgesia protocol for primary total knee arthroplasty. Reg Anesth Pain Med 45:799–804CrossRefPubMed Ochroch J, Qi V, Badiola I, Grosh T, Cai L, Graff V et al (2020) Analgesic efficacy of adding the IPACK block to a multimodal analgesia protocol for primary total knee arthroplasty. Reg Anesth Pain Med 45:799–804CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Padhy S, Patki AY, Kar AK, Durga P, Sireesha L (2021) Comparison of sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee (SPANK) block versus infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK) block when added to adductor canal block for pain control and knee rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised trial. Indian J Anaesth 65:792–797CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Padhy S, Patki AY, Kar AK, Durga P, Sireesha L (2021) Comparison of sensory posterior articular nerves of the knee (SPANK) block versus infiltration between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the knee (IPACK) block when added to adductor canal block for pain control and knee rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised trial. Indian J Anaesth 65:792–797CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Patterson ME, Vitter J, Bland K, Nossaman BD, Thomas LC, Chimento GF (2020) The effect of the IPACK block on pain after primary TKA: a double-blinded, prospective, randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 35:S173–S177CrossRefPubMed Patterson ME, Vitter J, Bland K, Nossaman BD, Thomas LC, Chimento GF (2020) The effect of the IPACK block on pain after primary TKA: a double-blinded, prospective, randomized trial. J Arthroplasty 35:S173–S177CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Rodriguez-Patarroyo FA, Cuello N, Molloy R, Krebs V, Turan A, Piuzzi NS (2021) A guide to regional analgesia for total knee arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 6:1181–1192CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rodriguez-Patarroyo FA, Cuello N, Molloy R, Krebs V, Turan A, Piuzzi NS (2021) A guide to regional analgesia for total knee arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 6:1181–1192CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Sankineani SR, Reddy ARC, Eachempati KK, Jangale A, Gurava Reddy AV (2018) Comparison of adductor canal block and IPACK block (interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee) with adductor canal block alone after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective control trial on pain and knee function in immediate postoperative period. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28:1391–1395CrossRefPubMed Sankineani SR, Reddy ARC, Eachempati KK, Jangale A, Gurava Reddy AV (2018) Comparison of adductor canal block and IPACK block (interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee) with adductor canal block alone after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective control trial on pain and knee function in immediate postoperative period. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28:1391–1395CrossRefPubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Siddiqui R, Bansal S, Puri A, Sinha M (2022) A comparative study of ultrasound-guided continuous adductor canal block with ultrasound-guided continuous femoral nerve block in unilateral total knee arthroplasty for limb mobilization and analgesic efficacy. Cureus 14:e22904PubMedPubMedCentral Siddiqui R, Bansal S, Puri A, Sinha M (2022) A comparative study of ultrasound-guided continuous adductor canal block with ultrasound-guided continuous femoral nerve block in unilateral total knee arthroplasty for limb mobilization and analgesic efficacy. Cureus 14:e22904PubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Tak R, Gurava Reddy AV, Jhakotia K, Karumuri K, Sankineani SR (2022) Continuous adductor canal block is superior to adductor canal block alone or adductor canal block combined with IPACK block (interspace between the popliteal artery and the posterior capsule of knee) in postoperative analgesia and ambulation following total knee arthroplasty: randomized control trial. Musculoskelet Surg 106:155–162CrossRefPubMed Tak R, Gurava Reddy AV, Jhakotia K, Karumuri K, Sankineani SR (2022) Continuous adductor canal block is superior to adductor canal block alone or adductor canal block combined with IPACK block (interspace between the popliteal artery and the posterior capsule of knee) in postoperative analgesia and ambulation following total knee arthroplasty: randomized control trial. Musculoskelet Surg 106:155–162CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Terkawi AS, Mavridis D, Sessler DI, Nunemaker MS, Doais KS, Terkawi RS et al (2017) Pain management modalities after total knee arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis of 170 randomized controlled trials. Anesthesiology 126:923–937CrossRefPubMed Terkawi AS, Mavridis D, Sessler DI, Nunemaker MS, Doais KS, Terkawi RS et al (2017) Pain management modalities after total knee arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis of 170 randomized controlled trials. Anesthesiology 126:923–937CrossRefPubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Uysal AI, Altiparmak B, Yasar E, Turan M, Canbek U, Yilmaz N et al (2020) The effects of early femoral nerve block intervention on preoperative pain management and incidence of postoperative delirium geriatric patients undergoing trochanteric femur fracture surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 26:109–114PubMed Uysal AI, Altiparmak B, Yasar E, Turan M, Canbek U, Yilmaz N et al (2020) The effects of early femoral nerve block intervention on preoperative pain management and incidence of postoperative delirium geriatric patients undergoing trochanteric femur fracture surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 26:109–114PubMed
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Vichainarong C, Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Songborassamee N (2020) Analgesic efficacy of infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee (iPACK) block added to local infiltration analgesia and continuous adductor canal block after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med 45:872–879CrossRefPubMed Vichainarong C, Kampitak W, Tanavalee A, Ngarmukos S, Songborassamee N (2020) Analgesic efficacy of infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee (iPACK) block added to local infiltration analgesia and continuous adductor canal block after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med 45:872–879CrossRefPubMed
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang CG, Ding YL, Wang YY, Liu JY, Zhang Q (2020) Comparison of adductor canal block and femoral triangle block for total knee arthroplasty. Clin J Pain 36:558–561CrossRefPubMed Wang CG, Ding YL, Wang YY, Liu JY, Zhang Q (2020) Comparison of adductor canal block and femoral triangle block for total knee arthroplasty. Clin J Pain 36:558–561CrossRefPubMed
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang CG, Ma WH, Liu R, Yang MY, Yang Y, Ding YL (2022) The effect of continuous adductor canal block combined with distal interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee block for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol 22:175CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wang CG, Ma WH, Liu R, Yang MY, Yang Y, Ding YL (2022) The effect of continuous adductor canal block combined with distal interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee block for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. BMC Anesthesiol 22:175CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
Clinical effects of interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the posterior knee block with multimodal analgesia for total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von
Yongjie Qiao
Feng Li
Lvdan Zhang
Xiaoyang Song
Xinyuan Yu
Wenbin Yang
Shenghu Zhou
Haoqiang Zhang
Publikationsdatum
15.02.2023
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Ausgabe 9/2023
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-023-04798-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2023

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 9/2023 Zur Ausgabe

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Knie-TEP: Kein Vorteil durch antibiotikahaltigen Knochenzement

29.05.2024 Periprothetische Infektionen Nachrichten

Zur Zementierung einer Knie-TEP wird in Deutschland zu über 98% Knochenzement verwendet, der mit einem Antibiotikum beladen ist. Ob er wirklich besser ist als Zement ohne Antibiotikum, kann laut Registerdaten bezweifelt werden.

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

28.05.2024 Häusliche Gewalt Nachrichten

In der Notaufnahme wird die Chance, Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt zu identifizieren, von Orthopäden und Orthopädinnen offenbar zu wenig genutzt. Darauf deuten die Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an der Sahlgrenska-Universität in Schweden hin.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.