Recep Aksu1, Cihangir Biçer2, Ayşe Ülgey2, Adnan Bayram2, Işın Güneş2, Ahmet Güney3, Mustafa Denizhan Yıldırım2, Günhan Gökahmetoğlu4, Karamehmet Yıldız2. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Erciyes University, Medical Faculty, Kayseri, Turkey. Electronic address: raksu@erciyes.edu.tr. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, Erciyes University, Medical Faculty, Kayseri, Turkey. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Erciyes University, Medical Faculty, Kayseri, Turkey. 4. Clinic of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Department of Anesthesiology, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this study, the aim was to compare postoperative analgesia effects of the administration of ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block and intra-articular bupivacaine carried out with bupivacaine. METHODS: In the first group of patients 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine and ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block (ISPB) were applied, while 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine was given via intra-articular (IA) administration to the second group patients after surgery. Patients in the third group were considered the control group and no block was performed. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine was used in all three groups for postoperative analgesia. RESULTS: In the ISPB group, morphine consumption in the periods between 0-4, 6-12 and 12-24 postoperative hours and total consumption within 24h was lower than in the other two groups. Morphine consumption in the IA group was lower than in the control group in the period from 0 to 6h and the same was true for total morphine consumption in 24h. Postoperative VASr scores in the ISPB group were lower than both of the other groups in the first 2h and lower than the control group in the 4th and 6th hours (p<0.05). In the IA group, VASr and VASm scores in the 2nd, 4th and 6th hours were lower than in the control group (p<0.05). CONCLUSION:Interscalene brachial plexus block was found to be more effective than intra-articular local anesthetic injection for postoperative analgesia.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In this study, the aim was to compare postoperative analgesia effects of the administration of ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block and intra-articularbupivacaine carried out with bupivacaine. METHODS: In the first group of patients 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine and ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block (ISPB) were applied, while 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine was given via intra-articular (IA) administration to the second group patients after surgery. Patients in the third group were considered the control group and no block was performed. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine was used in all three groups for postoperative analgesia. RESULTS: In the ISPB group, morphine consumption in the periods between 0-4, 6-12 and 12-24 postoperative hours and total consumption within 24h was lower than in the other two groups. Morphine consumption in the IA group was lower than in the control group in the period from 0 to 6h and the same was true for total morphine consumption in 24h. Postoperative VASr scores in the ISPB group were lower than both of the other groups in the first 2h and lower than the control group in the 4th and 6th hours (p<0.05). In the IA group, VASr and VASm scores in the 2nd, 4th and 6th hours were lower than in the control group (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Interscalene brachial plexus block was found to be more effective than intra-articular local anesthetic injection for postoperative analgesia.
Keywords:
Anestésico local intra-articular; Arthroscopic shoulder surgery; Bloqueio do plexo braquial por via interescalênica guiado por ultrassom; Bupivacaine; Bupivacaína; Cirurgia artroscópica do ombro; Intra-articular local anesthetic; Ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block
Authors: Nicholas A Trasolini; Ioanna K Bolia; Hyunwoo P Kang; Anthony Essilfie; Erik N Mayer; Reza Omid; Seth C Gamradt; George F Hatch; Alexander E Weber Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-06-23
Authors: Wu Jiangping; Quan Xiaolin; Shu Han; Xiaolan Zhou; Nie Mao; Deng Zhibo; Gong Ting; Hu Shidong; Li Xiangwei; Yuan Xin; Shu Guoyin Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-07-08