Intrathecal versus local infiltration analgesia for pain control in total joint arthroplasty.
meta_analysis · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 32188483.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1186/s13018-020-01627-4 and PMC identifier 7079456.
- Licence recorded as CC BY.
- The licence permits redistribution, so the abstract is shown in full and the full text is available from the publisher.
Abstract
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of intrathecal morphine (ITM) analgesia and local infiltration analgesia (LIA) for pain control in total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). All RCTs were comparing intrathecal analgesia and local infiltration analgesia in TJA. Primary outcomes were the visual analog scale (VAS) score with rest or mobilization up to 72 h. Secondary outcomes were the total morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and morphine-related complications. Compared with the intrathecal analgesia group, the LIA group was associated with a reduction in VAS score with rest up to 72 h. Moreover, LIA was associated with a decrease in VAS score with mobilization at 6 h, 12 h, 48 h, and 72 h. Moreover, LIA significantly reduced total morphine consumption (weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 15.37, 95% CI - 22.64 to - 8.83, P = 0.000), length of hospital stay (WMD = - 1.39, 95% CI - 1.67 to - 1.11, P = 0.000), and morphine-related complications (nausea and pruritus). Local infiltration provided superior analgesia and morphine-sparing effects within the first 72 h compared with ITM following TJA.
Medical subject headings
- Anesthesia, Local
- Arthroplasty, Replacement
- Injections, Spinal
- Pain Management