SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Shoulder”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Effect of different liposomal bupivacaine concentrations in ultrasound-guided superior trunk block on postoperative analgesia and mobility: a randomized double-blind controlled trial protocol for shoulder arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder arthroscopy frequently causes severe postoperative pain that may impede recovery. Liposomal bupivacaine provides prolonged analgesia, and ultrasound-guided superior trunk block (STB) offers comparable analgesia to interscalene block with a lower risk of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. However, the optimal concentration of liposomal bupivacaine for STB remains unknown. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, controlled trial will enrol 282 adult patients scheduled for elective arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Patients will be randomly allocated (1:1:1) to receive ultrasound-guided STB with liposomal bupivacaine 66 mg (Group A), 44 mg (Group B) or 33 mg (Group C), each diluted to 10 mL. The co-primary outcomes are (1) rest pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score at 48 h post-surgery and (2) cumulative oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME) consumption within 0-48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes include rest pain NRS scores at 6, 24 and 72 h; motor function assessed by Muscle Balance Scale, Bromage score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at 6, 24, 48 and 72 h; and Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score at 24 and 48 h. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence on the optimal concentration of liposomal bupivacaine for STB in arthroscopic shoulder surgery, aiming to achieve effective and prolonged analgesia without compromising shoulder mobility.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative inflammation after arthroplasty contributes to pain, delayed mobilization and prolonged hospitalization. Recent randomized trials have evaluated pharmacological anti-inflammatory strategies within contemporary enhanced recovery pathways, but evidence after hip and shoulder arthroplasty remains scattered across different drug classes and perioperative regimens. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence on perioperative anti-inflammatory agents after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched for English-language RCTs published from January 2020 to March 2026. The 2020-2026 window was selected to update evidence generated under modern arthroplasty, anesthesia, multimodal analgesia and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. Eligible trials included adults undergoing hip or shoulder arthroplasty and compared corticosteroids, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-based/local anti-inflammatory regimens, or related anti-inflammatory interventions with placebo, saline, no treatment, or the same regimen without the target component. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 800 patients were included. Anti-inflammatory interventions significantly reduced postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) [WMD=-32.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-41.16, -23.21), P<0.001], interleukin-6 (IL-6) [WMD=-31.25, 95% CI (-41.79, -20.77), P<0.001], rest pain [WMD=-0.41, 95% CI (-0.58, -0.23), P<0.001], activity pain [WMD=-0.56, 95% CI (-0.83, -0.29), P<0.001] and hospital stay [WMD=-0.54, 95% CI (-0.92, -0.15), P=0.006]. CONCLUSION: Recent RCT evidence suggests that perioperative anti-inflammatory interventions can attenuate early inflammatory responses and improve short-term pain and recovery after hip and shoulder arthroplasty. Because data were limited and clinically heterogeneous, the findings should not be interpreted as evidence favoring a specific drug class, dose, route, or timing.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Impact on analgesia, diaphragmatic function, and recovery between erector spinae plane block versus superior trunk block in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective analgesia and preservation of diaphragmatic function are key considerations in analgesia for shoulder surgery. The superior trunk block provides analgesia with reduced phrenic nerve involvement, while the erector spinae plane block offers minimal impact on diaphragm motion. This randomized controlled trial compared the analgesic efficacy, impact on diaphragmatic motion, and postoperative recovery between the two blocks. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive either erector spinae plane block or superior trunk block. Primary outcomes were postoperative VAS and changes in diaphragmatic excursion. Secondary outcomes included Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores, morphine-equivalent consumption, and the handgrip strength motor blockade. RESULTS: The superior trunk block resulted in significantly lower dynamic VAS at 1-h postoperatively (0.1 [0.0, 0.2] vs. 5.7 [4.0, 7.6]; p < 0.001) and reduced 24-h morphine consumption (7.8 [2.5, 15.0] mg vs. 12.7 [7.5, 17.3] mg; p = 0.038) compared to the erector spinae plane block. However, diaphragmatic excursion was better preserved in the erector spinae plane block group (8.37% ± 20.7% vs. -20.09% ± 22.2%; p < 0.001), with a lower incidence of partial hemidiaphragm paresis (3.3% vs. 46.7%; p < 0.001). At 24 h postoperatively, QoR-15 scores were higher in the superior trunk block group (p = 0.047), and no patient in either group developed handgrip motor blockade. CONCLUSIONS: Superior trunk block offers superior early postoperative analgesia and better overall recovery, while erector spinae plane block minimizes diaphragmatic impairment. However, the erector spinae plane block may represent an option only in carefully selected patients at high respiratory risk, acknowledging its significantly poorer early analgesic profile.

Humans↗