CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03409900Updated May 12, 2020

Lumbar Plexus Block Versus Quadratus Lumborum Block for Primary Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty

An interventional study of LPB and QLB in Osteoarthritis and Total Hip Arthroplasty, sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 95 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-05-12.

Sponsored by Wake Forest University Health Sciences · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
44
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 95 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful orthopedic procedures to effectively relieve pain and restore function in patients with end stage osteoarthritis. In an attempt to accelerate recovery many orthopedic surgeons have opted to utilize a direct anterior approach (DAA) as opposed to the more traditional posterolateral approach (PLA). The literature supports that DAA is superior to PLA with regard to lower blood loss, less pain, shorter hospital stay, and faster rehabilitation. Traditionally the study team has performed Lumbar Plexus blocks (LPB) to provide post-operative analgesia for total hip arthroplasty. The quadratus lumborum block (QLB) is a newer regional analgesic technique that may be as effective as LPB at providing pain control following DAA hip arthroplasty. This study is designed to compare the efficacy, with regards to post-operative pain management, between LPB and QLB following a DAA total hip arthroplasty.

Read the detailed description

In an attempt to accelerate recovery many orthopedic surgeons have opted to utilize a direct anterior approach (DAA) as opposed to the more traditional posterolateral approach (PLA) in regards to total hip arthroplasty (THA). The DAA technique involves dissection of muscular planes for insertion of components resulting in less tissue damage as compared to PLA. Traditionally the study team has performed Lumbar Plexus blocks (LPB) to provide post-operative analgesia for total hip arthroplasty. This technique works well for the traditionally performed PLA in that the hip joint and incision site are within the analgesic distribution of the LPB. Conversely, the DAA utilizes an anterior incision that overlies the L1 and L2 dermatomes as opposed to the lower lumbar dermatomes of the PLA incision. When performing LPB it has been the study team's clinical experience that it is rare to achieve analgesia in the proximal distribution of the lumbar plexus resulting in apparent sparing of the L1 and L2 nerve root distributions. The quadratus lumborum block (QLB) is a newer regional analgesic technique that may be as effective as LPB at providing pain control following DAA hip arthroplasty. The QLB is thought to provide analgesia by blocking both the lateral and anterior cutaneous branches of T7 through L4. This degree of dermatomal coverage suggests that QLB could be an efficacious alternative to LPB for DAA hip arthroplasty. It is hypothesized that the QLB will provide equivalent analgesia when compared to the LPB as determined by a comparison of verbal reported pain scores.

02

Conditions studied

  • Osteoarthritis
  • Total Hip Arthroplasty

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Lumbar Plexus Block
  • Quadratus Lumborum Block
  • Direct Anterior Approach
  • Post-Operative
  • Pain Management
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 95 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Any patient between the ages of 18 and 95 years undergoing a primary elective, unilateral DAA total hip arthroplasty.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • If the patient uses more than 40mg of Oxycodone equivalents per 24 hours or is on extended release opioid formulations.
  • Indication for surgery is secondary to trauma and/or hip fracture
  • If there is a contraindication to the performance of a regional block
  • Concomitant anticoagulation use or documented coagulopathy
  • Infectious or dermatologic conditions in the area of block placement that would otherwise increase the risk of peripheral nerve blockade
  • Presence of progressive neurologic deficit effecting peripheral nerves
  • Allergy or adverse reaction to study drugs to include: fentanyl, epinephrine, and amide local anesthetics
  • American Society of Anesthesia Physical Classification score > or = to 4
  • Allergies to study drugs other than local anesthetic
  • BMI > 40
  • Patient refusal
  • Pregnancy
  • Institutionalized individuals
  • Extremes of age: Age > 95 or \< 18
  • Non English speaking or inability to reliably participate in the study
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Care provider)
Enrollment
44 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    LPB Unilateral DAA THA

    Patients will be randomized to receive either a LPB or QLB for post-operative analgesia. Randomization to either LPB or QLB will occur via block randomization using sealed sequentially numbered opaque envelopes that will correspond to the order with which patients are enrolled. Patients and research assistants will be blinded to their randomization by administration of intravenous sedation (titrated to patient comfort), utilization of ultrasonography to visualize pertinent structures for both blocks, and by the nature of the block technique themselves both being in close proximity on the posterior lower back.

    Other: LPB

  • Experimental
    QLB Unilateral DAA THA

    Patients will be randomized to receive either a LPB or QLB for post-operative analgesia. Randomization to either LPB or QLB will occur via block randomization using sealed sequentially numbered opaque envelopes that will correspond to the order with which patients are enrolled. Patients and research assistants will be blinded to their randomization by administration of intravenous sedation (titrated to patient comfort), utilization of ultrasonography to visualize pertinent structures for both blocks, and by the nature of the block technique themselves both being in close proximity on the posterior lower back.

    Other: QLB

Interventions

  • OtherLPB

    The LPB will be performed in a lateral position, but modified to utilize ultrasound guidance to enhance our ability to quickly and safely locate the lumbar plexus as well as to avoid unblinding with regard to the traditional landmark LPB technique. For both LPB and QLB a TOTAL DOSE of 20 cc of the following local anesthetic mixture will be administered: Ropivacaine 0.2% and Epinephrine - 2.5 mcg/cc (1:400,000 concentration).

    Also known as: Lumbar Plexus Block

  • OtherQLB

    The QLB will be performed in a lateral position in a manner consistent with the technique first described by Børglum. For both LPB and QLB a TOTAL DOSE of 20 cc of the following local anesthetic mixture will be administered: Ropivacaine 0.2% and Epinephrine - 2.5 mcg/cc (1:400,000 concentration).

    Also known as: Quadratus Lumborum Block

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Verbal numeric pain score with hip flexion at 6hrs (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS))

    Quantified on an 10 point pain scale with 0 representing "no pain" and 10 representing "worst pain imaginable". Higher scores denotes worse outcomes.

    Time frame: 6 hours post block

Secondary outcomes

  1. Time to first analgesic

    Time from PACU discharge to first requested analgesic

    Time frame: During hospitalization, up to 24hrs

  2. Total opioid consumption over 24 hours

    Total opioid consumption in the first 24hrs

    Time frame: 24 hrs post block

  3. Verbal numeric pain score at 6hrs at rest (NRS)

    Quantified on an 10 point pain scale with 0 representing "no pain" and 10 representing "worst pain imaginable". Higher scores denotes worse outcomes.

    Time frame: 6hrs post block

  4. Verbal numeric pain score at rest and with movement at 24hrs post block

    Quantified on an 10 point pain scale with 0 representing "no pain" and 10 representing "worst pain imaginable". Higher scores denotes worse outcomes.

    Time frame: 24hrs post block

  5. Ability to straight leg raise on POD1

    Is the patient able to perform an unassisted straight leg raise

    Time frame: Post operative day 1

  6. Rates of opioid related side effects (nausea, vomiting, pruritis)

    Has the patient had any nausea, vomiting, or pruritis within the first 24hrs

    Time frame: Within 24hrs post block

  7. Patient satisfaction utilizing a Likert-scale questionnaire

    A patient satisfaction survey to administered on post operative day 1

    Time frame: Post operative day 1

06

Study locations

1 site
  • Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center
    Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157, United States
07

References and documents

Study documents

  • Informed consent form · Dec 26, 2019

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03409900
Lead sponsor
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 24, 2018
Start date
Mar 4, 2019
Primary completion
Nov 22, 2019
Completion
Nov 22, 2019
Last update
May 12, 2020

Study contacts

Christopher J Edwards, MD
principal investigator · Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2020. 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