CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01818531Updated Sep 13, 2018Results posted

Adductor Canal Block for Medial Compartment Knee Arthroplasty

A Phase 4 interventional study of Adductor canal block and Lumbar plexus block in Postoperative Analgesia and Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty, sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-09-13.

Sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
150
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 85 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study will evaluate the affects of a single injection ultrasound-guided adductor canal block for patients undergoing robotic-assisted (MAKOplasty) medial UKA (unicompartmental knee arthroplasty). Specifically, this study will compare the adequacy of postoperative analgesia provided by the adductor canal block with that provided by single injection lumbar plexus blockade. The working hypothesis is that the analgesia provided by the adductor canal block will be equivalent to the analgesia provided by the lumbar plexus block. The primary outcome will be a comparison of verbal numerical pain scores at rest and with movement over the first 24 hours following nerve blockade.

02

Conditions studied

  • Postoperative Analgesia
  • Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Keywords

  • Partial knee replacement
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Wake Forest University Health Sciences is the lead sponsor of 1,320 studies on the registry; 199 are open to participants now.

Of its 323 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 243 (75%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 85 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients aged 18-85
  • Undergoing unilateral robotic-assisted (MAKOplasty) medial compartment knee arthroplasty at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center.
  • Must give written informed consent for anesthesia including subarachnoid blockade and peripheral nerve blockade of both the lumbar plexus and adductor canal.
  • Must consent to the performance of a sham block at the site to which they are not randomized.
  • Must also be reliable to give accurate verbal pain scores postoperatively.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Contraindication to adductor canal blockade or lumbar plexus blockade (including significant coagulation abnormalities)
  • History of opioid addiction or current chronic pain therapy for pain other than at the surgical site that is being treated with high-dose opioids (extended release opioids or > 40mg oxycodone equivalents per day)
  • Allergy to study medications
  • Failure to adequately place either the adductor canal or lumbar plexus blocks.
  • Patients who decline or have a contraindication to subarachnoid blockade will also be excluded from the study.
  • Pregnancy.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Investigator)
Enrollment
150 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Adductor canal block

    Patients in this arm will receive an adductor canal block prior to undergoing a medial compartment knee arthroplasty.

    Drug: Adductor canal block

  • Active comparator
    Lumbar plexus block

    Patients in this arm will receive a lumbar plexus block prior to undergoing a medial compartment knee arthroplasty.

    Drug: Lumbar plexus block

Interventions

  • DrugAdductor canal block

    Also known as: Saphenous nerve block

  • DrugLumbar plexus block
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Verbal Pain Scores at 6 Hours Post Nerve Blockade.

    Comparison of verbal numerical pain scores at rest and with movement 6 hours following nerve blockade. The score range is 0-10 with higher scores denoting worse outcomes.

    Time frame: 6 hours post block.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Opioid Consumption

    Comparison of cumulative opioid consumption over 24 hour period between adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block.

    Time frame: 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours

  2. Time to First Analgesic

    Time to first analgesic between two groups: adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block.

    Time frame: 24 hours

  3. Opioid Related Side Effects

    Occurrence of opioid related side effects (nausea, vomiting and pruritus) between two groups: adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block.

    Time frame: 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours

  4. Quadriceps Motor Strength

    Comparison of quadriceps motor strength at 6 hour post nerve block between two groups: adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block. The score range is 0-5, with higher scores denoting better outcomes.

    Time frame: 6 hours

07

Results

Posted Sep 13, 2018

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
Started7575
Completed7473
Not completed12
Withdrew: Withdrawn for case delay after block10
Withdrew: Withdrawn for long-acting opioid patch01
Withdrew: Withdrawn for failure to place block01

Outcome measures

PrimaryVerbal Pain Scores at 6 Hours Post Nerve Blockade.

Comparison of verbal numerical pain scores at rest and with movement 6 hours following nerve blockade. The score range is 0-10 with higher scores denoting worse outcomes.

Time frame:
6 hours post block.
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Verbal Pain Scores at 6 Hours Post Nerve Blockade.
score on a scaleAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
rest1 ± 21.1 ± 2.2
movement1.6 ± 2.61.5 ± 2.8
SecondaryOpioid Consumption

Comparison of cumulative opioid consumption over 24 hour period between adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block.

Time frame:
6, 12, 18, and 24 hours
Reported as:
Mean · mg
Opioid Consumption
mgAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
6 hours1.5 ± 4.52.5 ± 5.2
12 hours11 ± 14.310.3 ± 11.5
18 hours20.9 ± 26.820.7 ± 17.8
24 hours27.9 ± 38.432.1 ± 27.7
SecondaryTime to First Analgesic

Time to first analgesic between two groups: adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block.

Time frame:
24 hours
Reported as:
Mean · minutes
Time to First Analgesic
minutesAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
Time to First Analgesic601 ± 295659 ± 366
SecondaryOpioid Related Side Effects

Occurrence of opioid related side effects (nausea, vomiting and pruritus) between two groups: adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block.

Time frame:
6, 12, 18, and 24 hours
Reported as:
Number · events
Opioid Related Side Effects
eventsAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
Nausea 6 hours1415
Nausea 12 hours1016
Nausea 18 hours58
Nausea 24 hours915
Vomiting 6 hours68
Vomiting 12 hours66
Vomiting 18 hours23
Vomiting 24 hours46
Pruritus 6 hours113
Pruritus 12 hours74
Pruritus 18 hours55
Pruritus 24 hours1013
SecondaryQuadriceps Motor Strength

Comparison of quadriceps motor strength at 6 hour post nerve block between two groups: adductor canal block and lumbar plexus block. The score range is 0-5, with higher scores denoting better outcomes.

Time frame:
6 hours
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Quadriceps Motor Strength
units on a scaleAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
Quadriceps Motor Strength4 ± 1.12.5 ± 1.3

Adverse events

Collected over 24 hours. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Adductor Canal Block0/74 (0%)0/74 (0%)38/74 (51.4%)
Lumbar Plexus Block0/73 (0%)0/73 (0%)43/73 (58.9%)
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventAdductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus Block
NauseaGastrointestinal disorders25/7432/73
PruritusSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders20/7416/73
VomittingGastrointestinal disorders15/7416/73

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Adductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus BlockTotal
Mean63 ± 10.263 ± 10.563 ± 10.4
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Adductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus BlockTotal
Female333972
Male413475
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Adductor Canal BlockLumbar Plexus BlockTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native000
Asian000
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander000
Black or African American111021
White6363126
More than one race000
Unknown or Not Reported000
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center
    Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Meek RM, Masri BA, Duncan CP. Minimally invasive unicompartmental knee replacement: rationale and correct indications. Orthop Clin North Am. 2004 Apr;35(2):191-200. doi: 10.1016/S0030-5898(03)00115-9. PubMed 15062705 ↗
  • Riddle DL, Jiranek WA, McGlynn FJ. Yearly incidence of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2008 Apr;23(3):408-12. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.04.012. Epub 2007 Nov 26. PubMed 18358380 ↗
  • Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780-5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222. PubMed 17403800 ↗
  • GARDNER E. The innervation of the knee joint. Anat Rec. 1948 May;101(1):109-30. doi: 10.1002/ar.1091010111. No abstract available. PubMed 18915634 ↗
  • Davis JJ, Bond TS, Swenson JD. Adductor canal block: more than just the saphenous nerve? Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009 Nov-Dec;34(6):618-9. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181bfbf00. No abstract available. PubMed 19901788 ↗
  • Horner G, Dellon AL. Innervation of the human knee joint and implications for surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Apr;(301):221-6. PubMed 8156678 ↗
  • Jenstrup MT, Jaeger P, Lund J, Fomsgaard JS, Bache S, Mathiesen O, Larsen TK, Dahl JB. Effects of adductor-canal-blockade on pain and ambulation after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Mar;56(3):357-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02621.x. Epub 2012 Jan 4. PubMed 22221014 ↗
  • Lund J, Jenstrup MT, Jaeger P, Sorensen AM, Dahl JB. Continuous adductor-canal-blockade for adjuvant post-operative analgesia after major knee surgery: preliminary results. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011 Jan;55(1):14-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2010.02333.x. Epub 2010 Oct 29. PubMed 21039357 ↗
  • Farrar JT, Berlin JA, Strom BL. Clinically important changes in acute pain outcome measures: a validation study. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2003 May;25(5):406-11. doi: 10.1016/s0885-3924(03)00162-3. PubMed 12727037 ↗
  • Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1987 Dec;15(6):657-80. doi: 10.1007/BF01068419. PubMed 3450848 ↗
10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 13, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01818531
Lead sponsor
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 26, 2013
Start date
Apr 2013
Primary completion
May 2015
Completion
May 2015
Results posted
Sep 13, 2018
Last update
Sep 13, 2018

Study contacts

Daryl S Henshaw, MD
principal investigator · Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion