| Literature DB >> 29197338 |
Ting Li1,2, Qiguang Ye2, Daozhu Wu3, Jun Li2, Jingui Yu4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The sympathetic block of upper limb leading to increased blood flow has important clinical implication in microvascular surgery. However, little is known regarding the relationship between concentration of local anesthetic and blood flow of upper limb. The aim of this dose-response study was to determine the ED50 and ED95 of ropivacaine in blood flow after supraclavicular block (SB).Entities:
Keywords: Brachial plexus, nerve block; Hemodynamics; Local anesthetic; Upper extremity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29197338 PMCID: PMC5712185 DOI: 10.1186/s12871-017-0447-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Anesthesiol ISSN: 1471-2253 Impact factor: 2.217
Fig. 1PWD Ultrasound of the brachial artery after brachial plexus block. PS: peak systolic velocity (cm/s.). ED: end-diastolic velocity (cm/s.). TAMAX: time average maximum velocity (cm/s.)
Fig. 2The CONSORT flow diagram for randomized controlled trials
Patients characteristics and changes of MAP and HR in different concentration groups at baseline (t0) and 30 min after brachial plexus block (t1)
| Groups( | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | ||
| Male/female | 6/7 | 8/5 | 7/6 | 8/5 | 9/4 | 9/4 | |
| Age (yr) | 37(14) | 37(13) | 43(16) | 36(15) | 39(16) | 44(17) | |
| Height (cm) | 163(7) | 166(6) | 165(7) | 164(5) | 167(7) | 169(8) | |
| Weight (kg) | 58(9) | 60(9) | 62(8) | 61(10) | 62(7) | 62(8) | |
| MAP | t0 | 86(13) | 87(5) | 85(12) | 85(14) | 86(10) | 85(13) |
| t1 | 86(13) | 87(5) | 86(12) | 84(12) | 86(9) | 87(14) | |
| HR | t0 | 75(5) | 67(8) | 72(8) | 69(8) | 67(7) | 68(8) |
| t1 | 75(5) | 66(8) | 71(8) | 70(7) | 65(8) | 66(8) | |
Values are number or mean (SD)
MAP Mean Arterial Pressure, HR Heart Rate
Hemodynamic parameters of brachial artery and temperature of skin in different concentration groups at baseline (t0) and 30 min after brachial plexus block (t1)
| Groups(n = 13) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | ||
| TAMAX(cm/s) | t0 | 23.1(5.6) | 20.9(5.9) | 19.6(5.6) | 19.1(6.0) | 18.7(8.4) | 19.1(7.0) |
| t1 | 29.7(7.5)* | 33.6(8.1)* | 35.5(8.1)* | 39.1(10.6)* | 44.8(18.8)* | 49.3(19.9)* | |
| CSA(cm2) | t0 | 0.126(0.025) | 0.140(0.056) | 0.133(0.031) | 0.131(0.035) | 0.114(0.028) | 0.114(0.038) |
| t1 | 0.145(0.032)* | 0.159(0.062)* | 0.155(0.038)* | 0.162(0.042)* | 0.149(0.038)* | 0.155(0.055)* | |
| BF(ml/s) | t0 | 178.2(62.5) | 175.9(93.6) | 158.2(65.0) | 148.6(59.8) | 127.6(61.7) | 135.5(71.3) |
| t1 | 259.3(87.7)* | 320.3(152.0)* | 330.4(118.4)* | 378.7(143.9)* | 399.7(190.9)* | 465.2(240.6)* | |
| Ts(°C) | t0 | 31.0(1.4) | 29.6(1.1) | 30.2(1.4) | 29.5(1.3) | 29.5(1.1) | 29.8(0.8) |
| t1 | 32.2(1.2)* | 31.5(0.9)* | 32.5(1.2)* | 31.8(1.3)* | 31.9(1.2)* | 32.2(1.2)* | |
Mean and SD values rounded to 2 decimal places
P values are results of 2-tailed, paired student t tests. * P < 0.01 compared with t0
TAMAX time average maximum velocity (cm/s), CSA cross section area, BF blood flow, Ts skin temperature
Fig. 3The dose-response curve of value of ΔBF (BFt1/ BFt0) against the log (concentration) of ropivacine and scattergram for supraclavicular block
Fig. 4Linear regression plot of the probit value against the log (concentration) of ropivacine for supraclavicular block