Comparison of the Analgesic Efficacy between Levobupivacaine 0.25% and Ropivacaine 0.375% for PENG (Pericapsular Nerve Group) Block in the Context of Hip Fracture Surgery of Elderly Patients: A Single-Center, Randomized, and Controlled Clinical Trial

J Clin Med. 2024 Jan 29;13(3):770. doi: 10.3390/jcm13030770.

Abstract

Previous studies have compared levobupivacaine versus ropivacaine in various peripheral nerve blocks in terms of block duration, quality of analgesia, and onset time, but this has not occurred in the PENG block. Here, a single-center, randomized, and controlled clinical trial is presented. One hundred and twenty patients older than 65 years suffering from hip fractures and surgically treated at our institution under spinal anesthesia were eligible for participation; of them, one hundred and eight were analyzed. Patients were randomized to receive ultrasound-guided PENG blocks using 20 mL of either 0.25% levobupivacaine or 0.375% ropivacaine (both of which are equipotent concentrations). The primary endpoint was to compare the analgesic duration (time to first rescue) and analgesic quality (pain scores using the VAS, PAINAD, and AlgoPlus scales) between the groups. Secondary endpoints included comparing the onset time, describing the need for and type of rescue analgesics, and possible associated adverse effects. There were no statistically significant differences in analgesic duration between levobupivacaine (median 861.0, IQR 960) and ropivacaine (median 1205.0, IQR 1379; p = 0.069). Likewise, the quality of analgesia and onset time were comparable among the groups. A small number of patients required opioids as rescue analgesics (4.6%). The possible associated adverse effects included postoperative infection (11.1%) and delirium (2.8%).

Keywords: frail elderly; hip fractures; levobupivacaine; nerve block; pain management; pain measurement; pain postoperative; ropivacaine; ultrasonography.

Grants and funding

The present clinical trial was fully funded through internal funds from the Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca de la FIESCYL (IBSAL-FIESCYL). No external funding was received from any governmental or private entities, nor have any agreements with third parties been established for the financing of this research. This institution has indirectly financed this study in the form of payment of the salary entitled to Ricardo López-Pérez as an employee of the said institution, who is the study sponsor responsible for monitoring the clinical trial and is mentioned in the acknowledgments section of the study. None of the study’s authors have received direct or indirect funding.