BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It is currently unknown if the primary determinant of continuous peripheral nerve block effects is simply total drug dose, or whether local anesthetic concentration and/or volume have an influence. We therefore tested the null hypothesis that providing ropivacaine at different concentrations and rates--but at an equal total basal dose--produces similar effects when used in a continuous interscalene nerve block. METHODS: Preoperatively, an anterolateral interscalene perineural catheter was inserted using the anterolateral approach in patients undergoing moderately painful shoulder surgery. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive a postoperative perineural infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine (basal 8 mL/h, bolus 4 mL) or 0.4% ropivacaine (basal 4 mL/h, bolus 2 mL) through the second postoperative day. Our primary endpoint was the incidence of an insensate hand/finger during the 24 hours beginning the morning following surgery. RESULTS: The incidence of an insensate hand/finger did not differ between the treatment groups (n = 50) to a statistically significant degree (0.2% ropivacaine, mean [SD] of 0.8 [1.3] times; 0.4% ropivacaine, mean 0.3 [0.6] times; estimated difference = 0.5 episodes, 95% confidence interval, -0.1 to 1.1 episodes; P = .080). However, this is statistically inconclusive given the confidence interval. In contrast, pain (P = .020) and dissatisfaction (P = .011) were greater in patients given 0.4% ropivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: For continuous interscalene nerve blocks, given the statistically inconclusive primary endpoint results and design limitations of the current study, further research on this topic is warranted. In contrast, providing a lower concentration of local anesthetic at a higher basal rate provided superior analgesia.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It is currently unknown if the primary determinant of continuous peripheral nerve block effects is simply total drug dose, or whether local anesthetic concentration and/or volume have an influence. We therefore tested the null hypothesis that providing ropivacaine at different concentrations and rates--but at an equal total basal dose--produces similar effects when used in a continuous interscalene nerve block. METHODS: Preoperatively, an anterolateral interscalene perineural catheter was inserted using the anterolateral approach in patients undergoing moderately painful shoulder surgery. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive a postoperative perineural infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine (basal 8 mL/h, bolus 4 mL) or 0.4% ropivacaine (basal 4 mL/h, bolus 2 mL) through the second postoperative day. Our primary endpoint was the incidence of an insensate hand/finger during the 24 hours beginning the morning following surgery. RESULTS: The incidence of an insensate hand/finger did not differ between the treatment groups (n = 50) to a statistically significant degree (0.2% ropivacaine, mean [SD] of 0.8 [1.3] times; 0.4% ropivacaine, mean 0.3 [0.6] times; estimated difference = 0.5 episodes, 95% confidence interval, -0.1 to 1.1 episodes; P = .080). However, this is statistically inconclusive given the confidence interval. In contrast, pain (P = .020) and dissatisfaction (P = .011) were greater in patients given 0.4% ropivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: For continuous interscalene nerve blocks, given the statistically inconclusive primary endpoint results and design limitations of the current study, further research on this topic is warranted. In contrast, providing a lower concentration of local anesthetic at a higher basal rate provided superior analgesia.
Authors: Ignace Sandefo; J-M Bernard; Van Elstraete; T Lebrun; B Polin; F Alla; C Poey; L Savorit Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Timothy E Morey; Lisa J Thannikary; Thomas W Wright; F Kayser Enneking Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Vanessa J Loland; J C Gerancher; Anupama N Wadhwa; Elizabeth M Renehan; Daniel I Sessler; Jonathan J Shuster; Douglas W Theriaque; Rosalita C Maldonado; Edward R Mariano Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Maria Bauer; Lu Wang; Olusegun K Onibonoje; Chad Parrett; Daniel I Sessler; Loran Mounir-Soliman; Sherif Zaky; Viktor Krebs; Leonard T Buller; Michael C Donohue; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley; Brian M Ilfeld Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Joseph M Neal; J C Gerancher; James R Hebl; Brian M Ilfeld; Colin J L McCartney; Carlo D Franco; Quinn H Hogan Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2009 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 6.288
Authors: Matthew T Charous; Sarah J Madison; Preetham J Suresh; NavParkash S Sandhu; Vanessa J Loland; Edward R Mariano; Michael C Donohue; Pascual H Dutton; Eliza J Ferguson; Brian M Ilfeld Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Edward R Mariano; Vanessa J Loland; NavParkash S Sandhu; Michael L Bishop; Daniel K Lee; Alexandra K Schwartz; Paul J Girard; Eliza J Ferguson; Brian M Ilfeld Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2010-08-11 Impact factor: 5.063
Authors: Chun Woo Yang; Sung Mee Jung; Hee Uk Kwon; Choon-Kyu Cho; Jin Woong Yi; Chul Woung Kim; Jong-Kwon Jung; Young Mi An Journal: Korean J Anesthesiol Date: 2010-07-21
Authors: Nicholas C K Lam; Matthew Charles; Deana Mercer; Codruta Soneru; Jennifer Dillow; Francisco Jaime; Timothy R Petersen; Edward R Mariano Journal: Anesthesiol Res Pract Date: 2014-04-15