Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Active, Not Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07153575

Postoperative Analgesia in Hip Arthroplasty

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare analgesic effectiveness of two blocks in hip arthroplasty. The main question that aim to answer is;

-Which block is more efficient? Researchers will compare suprainguinal fascia iliaca block with perineural nerve group block.

Participants will randomized and one of the blocks will be applied.

Active, Not Recruiting

This study is active but is not currently recruiting participants.

Key information

Conditions

Hip Fractures Femoral Fractures Fractures, Bone Hip Injuries Leg Injuries Nausea Neurologic Manifestations Pain Pain, Postoperative Pathologic Processes Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms Post Operative Pain Postoperative Complications Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Signs and Symptoms Signs and Symptoms, Digestive Vomiting Wounds and Injuries

Age range

18 year–75 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Balikesir University

Balıkesir, 10140, Turkey (Türkiye)

About this study

Postoperative pain and analgesia in hip surgery is an important issue for early mobilization and length of hospital stay. The patient population is usually elderly. Prolonged hospital stay may cause thromboembolic complications due to delayed mobilization, psychiatric conditions such as delirium, and many undesirable conditions caused by pain such as chronicisation of acute pain. There are neuraxial analgesia, regional analgesia and multimodal analgesia regimens that are used together to prevent postoperative pain and to prevent these undesirable conditions caused by pain. Suprainguinal fascia iliaca block and pericapsular nerve group blocks are two of those. With performing these blocks, we will obtain postoperative analgesia and avoid postoperative complications.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Volunteer patients undergoing hip arthroplasty
  • Voluntary patient to undergo elective operation under regional anaesthesia
  • ASA I-II-III
  • BMI≤35 kg/m²

Exclusion criteria

  • Obstacles to the application of regional anaesthesia
  • Local Anaesthetic Allergy
  • Coagulopathy
  • Psychiatric disorders and medication
  • Hematological/Oncological disease
  • Severe organ failure
  • Multiple bone fractures
  • Alcohol/Drug addiction
  • Used analgesic medication up to 12 hours before surgery
  • Infection at the Block Application Site
  • Mental Deficiency
  • Morbidly obese patients

Treatment and study plan

suprainguinal fascia iliaca block

Procedure

The ultrasound-guided suprainguinal fascia iliaca block (SFIB) procedure was first described by Hebbard et al. in 2011. It is a prevalent regional anesthesia technique employed in surgical procedures involving the hip joint and femur. Local anesthetics are administered in close proximity to the fascia iliaca. The primary objective is to obstruct the femoral, obturator and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve in a simultaneous manner. In clinical practice, it is a safe and simple alternative to lumbar plexus blocks and femoral blocks. A 30-ml solution of 0.25% bupivacaine was injected between the iliac muscle and the iliac fascia. The bupivacaine dosage administered in the study was standardized for the groups by employing equal concentrations and volumes.

pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block

Procedure

In pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block the local anesthetic agent is injected into the musculofascial plane between the psoas muscle tendon and the pubic ramus. The primary objective of this technique is to obstruct the genicular branches of the femoral, obturator, and accessory obturator which innervate the hip capsule. Therefore, a comparison with the SFIB was undertaken. A 30-ml block of 0.25% bupivacaine solution was injected between the pubic ramus and the iliopsoas muscle tendon. The bupivacaine dosage administered in the study was standardized for the groups by employing equal concentrations and volumes.

Primary outcomes

  1. To compare the postoperative analgesic efficacy of SFIB and PENG block

    Time frame: 24 hours

    Calculating total morphine consumption over 24 hours in patients by using patient controlled analgesia pump.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Postoperative analgesia scores

    Time frame: 24 hours

    Detecting postoperative analgesia scores during rest and movement by using Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores. The scale ranges from 0 - 10. Zero represents no pain, while 10 represents the worst possible pain.

  2. Assessment of nausea and vomiting incidence

    Time frame: 24 hours

    The incidence of nausea and vomiting was examined at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 hours post-intervention. The data were analyzed across groups using a 4-point categorical scoring system, with the following definitions: No nausea: 0; Mild: 1; Moderate: 2; Severe: 3.

Other outcomes

  1. Satisfaction levels

    Time frame: 24 hour

    An assessment was also conducted to determine the subjects' satisfaction levels using the Quality of Recovery-15T (QoR-15T) survey at 24th hour. This scale provides a score ranging from 0 to150, with a high score indicating a good quality of recovery.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Balikesir University

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Comparison of the Postoperative Analgesic Effectiveness of Suprainguinal Fascia Iliaca Block (SFIB) and Pericapsular Nerve Block (PENG) in Hip Arthroplasty

Important dates

Study start
2023
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2025
First posted
Sep 4, 2025
Registry last updated
Sep 4, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.