Literature DB >> 20299995

Comfort of the patient during axillary blocks placement: a randomized comparison of the neurostimulation and the ultrasound guidance techniques.

Sébastien Bloc1, Luc Mercadal, Thierry Garnier, Bernard Komly, Pascal Leclerc, Bertrand Morel, Claude Ecoffey, Gilles Dhonneur.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Axillary brachial plexus block under neurostimulation is commonly used for upper limb surgery, but it is sometimes recognized as an uncomfortable technique, with most patients identifying electrical stimulation as an unpleasant moment. Ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia, which becomes an increasingly popular technique, does not require electrical stimulation and then should theoretically improve axillary block placement comfort. The aim of this study was to compare the comfort of the patients during axillary block placement with neurostimulation and ultrasound guidance using either the out-of-plane or the in-plane approach.
METHODS: Consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled in three equal groups: neurostimulation, ultrasound out-of-plane and ultrasound in-plane approaches. A score was used to measure the comfort of the patients during axillary blocks placement. This score included three criteria: maximum pain intensity perceived during block placement measured using a visual analogue scale (0, no pain and 100, maximal or worse imaginable pain), the number of unpleasant events declared by the patients and the satisfaction of the patient (unsatisfied, acceptable, satisfied, very satisfied). The comfort score was calculated as the sum of each criterion, which was attributed a value of 0 or 1: visual analogue scale (<or=30/100, 1; >30/100, 0), number of unpleasant events (0, 1; >or=1, 0) and satisfaction (satisfied or very satisfied, 1; acceptable or unsatisfied, 0). Procedures of axillary blocks placement resulting in a comfort score of 3 and 2 were arbitrary considered as very comfortable and comfortable, respectively. Success rate of axillary blocks, time to perform block and complications related to procedures were noted.
RESULTS: One hundred and twenty patients were included. In the ultrasound out-of-plane group, 55% (22/40) and 25% (10/40) of the procedures were very comfortable and comfortable as compared with 32% (13/40, P < 0.05) and 20% (8/40, P < 0.01) in the ultrasound in-plane group and 25% (10/40, P < 0.01) and 8% (3/40, P < 0.01) in the neurostimulation group, respectively. Duration of axillary placement was significantly smaller in the ultrasound out-of-plane group as compared with that of in-plane approaches (P < 0.05) and neurostimulation (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: The present study showed that the ultrasound approaches were less painful and more comfortable than neurostimulation to place axillary blocks. We also showed that, although pain intensity resulting from blocks placement was similar with the ultrasound approaches, very comfortable procedures were more frequent with the out-of-plane than with the in-plane approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20299995     DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e328333fc0a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol        ISSN: 0265-0215            Impact factor:   4.330


  7 in total

1.  Clinical indications for image guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)-part III, nerves of the upper limb.

Authors:  Luca Maria Sconfienza; Miraude Adriaensen; Domenico Albano; Georgina Allen; Maria Pilar Aparisi Gómez; Alberto Bazzocchi; Ian Beggs; Bianca Bignotti; Vito Chianca; Angelo Corazza; Danoob Dalili; Miriam De Dea; Jose Luis Del Cura; Francesco Di Pietto; Eleni Drakonaki; Fernando Facal de Castro; Dimitrios Filippiadis; Jan Gielen; Salvatore Gitto; Harun Gupta; Andrea S Klauser; Radhesh Lalam; Silvia Martin; Carlo Martinoli; Giovanni Mauri; Catherine McCarthy; Eugene McNally; Kalliopi Melaki; Carmelo Messina; Rebeca Mirón Mombiela; Benedikt Neubauer; Marina Obradov; Cyprian Olchowy; Davide Orlandi; Raquel Prada Gonzalez; Saulius Rutkauskas; Ziga Snoj; Alberto Stefano Tagliafico; Alexander Talaska; Violeta Vasilevska-Nikodinovska; Jelena Vucetic; David Wilson; Federico Zaottini; Marcello Zappia; Athena Plagou
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  [Guidance of axillary multiple injection technique for plexus anesthesia. Ultrasound versus nerve stimulation].

Authors:  J T Meierhofer; M Anetseder; N Roewer; C Wunder; U Schwemmer
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 3.  Ultrasound guidance for upper and lower limb blocks.

Authors:  Sharon R Lewis; Anastasia Price; Kevin J Walker; Ken McGrattan; Andrew F Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-11

Review 4.  Single, double or multiple-injection techniques for non-ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults undergoing surgery of the lower arm.

Authors:  Ki Jinn Chin; Javier E Cubillos; Husni Alakkad
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-09-02

5.  Axillary brachial plexus block.

Authors:  Ashish R Satapathy; David M Coventry
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2011-05-22

6.  Peripheral Nerve Injury After Upper-Extremity Surgery Performed Under Regional Anesthesia: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Max Lester Silverstein; Ruth Tevlin; Kenneth Elliott Higgins; Rachel Pedreira; Catherine Curtin
Journal:  J Hand Surg Glob Online       Date:  2022-06-04

7.  The Use of a New Device-Assisted Needle Guidance versus Conventional Approach to Perform Ultrasound Guided Brachial Plexus Blockade: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Authors:  Amaresh Vydyanathan; Priya Agrawal; Naveen Shetty; Singh Nair; Nancy Shilian; Naum Shaparin
Journal:  Local Reg Anesth       Date:  2022-07-25
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.