Iliopsoas (IPB) and Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Blocks Comparison on Analgesia and Recovery After Total Hip Arthroplasty
NCT ID: NCT06964282
Last Updated: 2025-05-15
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
118 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-10-01
2026-10-10
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
In recent years, regional anesthesia has become more popular because it can reduce pain and the need for strong pain medications like morphine. For hip surgery, the PENG block is already known to be effective. A newer method, called the iliopsoas plane block (IPB), is very similar and has also shown good results in hip arthroscopy. However, these two techniques have never been directly compared in patients undergoing hip replacement surgery using the posterior approach.
Goal:
This study aims to see if the IPB is just as effective as the PENG block for controlling pain and helping patients recover well after hip replacement surgery.
Method:
118 adult patients scheduled for hip replacement under spinal anesthesia will be randomly assigned to receive either: IPB: 7 ml of Ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml PENG: 14 ml of Ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml Both injections are given under ultrasound guidance 30 minutes before spinal anesthesia. Neither the patient, the surgeon, nor the data collector will know which technique was used.
Post-Surgery Care:
All patients will receive standard pain relief, including:
Paracetamol every 6 hours Etoricoxib once a day Morphine via a patient-controlled pump for 48 hours
Main Outcome Measured:
The primary goal is to compare pain during movement 6 hours after surgery, using a pain scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). The study will consider the two blocks equivalent if the difference in average pain scores is less than 1 point.
Other Outcomes:
Total morphine used in 48 hours Pain scores at rest and during movement at various time points Walking ability (2- and 6-minute walk tests, and timed-up-and-go test) Quality of recovery (using the QoR-15 questionnaire) Side effects of morphine Patient satisfaction Length of hospital stay
Safety:
Both techniques are safe and already used in clinical practice. Ultrasound guidance minimizes risks like nerve injury, bleeding, or infection.
Conclusion:
If the IPB is shown to be as effective as the PENG block, both can be considered reliable options for pain control and early recovery after hip replacement surgery.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block Versus Supra-inguinal Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block for Pain Management After Total Hip Arthroplasty: a Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT04426045
PENG Block vs Supra-inguinal Fascia Iliaca Compartment Block for Postoperative Opioids Consumption and Early Motor Recovery After THA: a Randomized Controlled Non-inferiority Clinical Trial.
NCT04690023
Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) Block Versus Periarticular Injection for Pain Management After Total Hip Arthroplasty
NCT04981236
Total Periarticular Infiltration Vs Posterior Periarticular Infiltration Plus PENG Block for Hip Analgesia
NCT06075004
Pericapsular Nerve Group Block for Elective Hip Arthroplasty
NCT04231123
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The PENG block, which targets the articular branches of the femoral, obturator, and accessory obturator nerves, has become increasingly used in anterior and lateral hip surgeries. The IPB, though more recently introduced, involves injection in a similar anatomical region and has shown good analgesic results in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. Given their overlapping targets, these two blocks may offer comparable clinical benefits; however, this has not been validated in THA performed through a posterior approach.
To address this gap, the current randomized, double-blind equivalence trial will compare the two techniques using standardized ultrasound-guided procedures and uniform dosing of ropivacaine adjusted for volume and concentration. All patients will receive the same spinal anesthetic and postoperative analgesia regimen, minimizing confounding factors.
The primary objective is to determine whether IPB provides pain control equivalent to the PENG block during early postoperative mobilization. By assessing patient-reported pain scores, along with recovery quality and opioid use, the study aims to generate evidence that may inform anesthesia planning in joint replacement surgeries and support the integration of newer regional techniques into enhanced recovery protocols.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
QUADRUPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group PENG
Patients will receive a pericapsular nerve group block with 14 ml of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml, administered 30 minutes prior to spinal anesthesia.
PENG Block
Also performed under ultrasound guidance with an 80 mm B-Braun X360 needle and a 3-5 MHz curved probe. The femoral nerve, femoral artery, iliopsoas muscle, and pubic ramus are identified. The needle is inserted in-plane, and 14 ml of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml is injected between the psoas tendon and pubic ramus.
IPB Group
Patients will receive an iliopsoas plane block with 7 ml of ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml, administered 30 minutes prior to spinal anesthesia.
Iliopsoas nerve block
Performed under ultrasound guidance with a curvilinear probe (5-2 MHz). The transducer is positioned transversely below the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS), then pivoted medially. After identifying the femoral head and acetabular rim, a 22G 80 mm needle is inserted in-plane to reach the iliopsoas plane, lateral to the iliopsoas tendon. 7 ml of ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml is then injected.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
PENG Block
Also performed under ultrasound guidance with an 80 mm B-Braun X360 needle and a 3-5 MHz curved probe. The femoral nerve, femoral artery, iliopsoas muscle, and pubic ramus are identified. The needle is inserted in-plane, and 14 ml of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml is injected between the psoas tendon and pubic ramus.
Iliopsoas nerve block
Performed under ultrasound guidance with a curvilinear probe (5-2 MHz). The transducer is positioned transversely below the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS), then pivoted medially. After identifying the femoral head and acetabular rim, a 22G 80 mm needle is inserted in-plane to reach the iliopsoas plane, lateral to the iliopsoas tendon. 7 ml of ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml is then injected.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liege
OTHER
University of Liege
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Michele Carella
Clinical Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Michele Carella, MD, PhD, ESRA-DRA
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Liège University Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Liege University Hospital
Liège, , Belgium
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2025-172
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.