PENG vs L-ESPB With S-ESPB for Analgesia in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Overview

The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether different types of regional anesthesia can improve pain control and functional recovery after total hip arthroplasty in adult patients undergoing elective hip replacement surgery. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does the PENG block reduce opioid use in the first 48 hours after surgery more effectively than the combined L-ESPB + S-ESPB technique? Which method provides better pain relief, preserves muscle strength, and supports earlier mobilization? Researchers will compare the Pericapsular Nerve Group (PENG) block with the combination of Lumbar and Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Blocks (L-ESPB + S-ESPB) to see which provides better pain control, fewer side effects, and faster recovery. Participants will: Be randomly assigned to receive one of the two types of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia Undergo standard hip replacement surgery under spinal anesthesia Be monitored for pain scores, opioid use, time to first walking, muscle strength, satisfaction, and side effects over the first 48 hours after surgery.

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with moderate-to-severe postoperative pain, which can impair early mobilization and functional recovery. Regional anesthesia techniques, such as the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block and the erector spinae plane (ESP) block, have been introduced as motor-sparing alternatives to femoral and lumbar plexus blocks. The PENG block targets articular branches of the femoral, obturator, and accessory obturator nerves, offering effective analgesia with minimal motor blockade. Meanwhile, the lumbar ESPB (L-ESPB) and sacral ESPB (S-ESPB) may provide a broader, yet still motor-sparing, analgesic field by targeting both lumbar and sacral nerve roots involved in hip innervation. To date, no randomized trial has compared PENG with a dual-level ESP block approach (L-ESPB + S-ESPB) in THA patients.