Skip to content

IPACK Block Versus Adductor Canal Block in High Tibeal Osteotomy

Infiltration of Local Anesthetic in the Interspace Between the Popliteal Artery and Capsule of the Posterior Knee IPACK Block Versus Adductor Canal Block ACB for Pain Relief After Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05271188
Enrollment
60
Registered
2022-03-08
Start date
2022-03-15
Completion date
2023-03-31
Last updated
2022-03-08

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Pain, Postoperative

Brief summary

A comparison between IPACK block and adductor canal block in post operative pain management

Detailed description

Two groups of patients between 40 and 60 yrs who are undergoing open wedge high tibeal osteotomy Group 1 will receive IPACK block with 15 ml Bupivacaine, immediately before spinal anaesthesia . Group 2 will receive adductor canal block ,also with 15 ml Bupivacaine. before spinal anaesthesia. register the time of first pain sensation and firs IV analgesic dose required in each group

Interventions

PROCEDUREInfiltration of local anaesthetic between popliteal artery and posterior knee capsule

Adductor canal block (ACB) is a popular peripheral nerve block that has been shown to decrease pain significantly and thereby opioid consumption with minimal effect on quadriceps function \[8\]. Though ACB provides analgesia to the peripatellar and intra-articular aspect of knee joint, it does not relieve posterior knee pain which is moderate to severe in intensity \[9, 10\]. The recent technique of an ultrasound (US)-guided local anesthetic infiltration of the interspace between popliteal artery and the capsule of posterior knee (IPACK) has shown to provide significant posterior knee analgesia without affecting the common peroneal nerve (CPN) \[11\]. We postulated that IPACK will provide better pain relief and improve knee function in the immediate postoperative period compared to ACB

Sponsors

Assiut University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Two groups of people who are undergoing open wedge high tibeal osteotomy aged between 40 and 60 yrs old not diabetic and neurologically free

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Age 40 - 60 years. 2. American Society of Anesthiologist class ( ASA) I - III 3. BMI 18-35 kg/m2 4. Scheduled for primary unilateral open wedge high tibial osteotomy

Exclusion criteria

1. Known allergy to local anesthetics 2. Contraindication to local anesthetics injection e.g. infection at the site of injection 3. Contraindication to spinal anesthesia e.g. coagulopathy. 4. Patients with pre-existing motor or sensory deficits in lower extremities. 5. Insulin or noninsulin dependent diabetes mellitus. 6. systemic corticosteroid use within 30-days of surgery 7. difficulties in comprehending visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores 8. history of arrhythmia or seizures 9. severe renal insufficiency

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
the time of first pain sensation requiring analgesia24 hoursIf intervention which is adductor canal block or lPACK block is effective in postoperative pain control that can decrease the lV analgesic agents

Contacts

Primary ContactSalwa Hussein
salwa94hussien@gmail.com01159460234
Backup ContactAbd elraheem Mahmoud
arawamyyy@yahoo.com01000032655

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026