Shalini Dhir1, Brigid Brown2, Peter Mack3, Yves Bureau4, Janice Yu5, Douglas Ross6. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, St. Joseph's Health Care, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: shalini.dhir@sjhc.london.on.ca. 2. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Flinders Medical Center, Adelaide, Australia. Electronic address: brigid.brown@gmail.com. 3. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, St. Joseph's Health Care, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: Peter.Mack@lhsc.on.ca. 4. Department of Psychology, Department of Medical Biophysics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: ybureau@lawsonimaging.ca. 5. McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: janice.yu@medportal.ca. 6. Division of Plastic Surgery, St. Joseph's Health Care, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: Douglas.Ross@sjhc.london.on.ca.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of supraclavicular and infraclavicular approaches to brachial plexus block for elbow surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, parallel arm, observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: This study occurred in a designated block room at St. Joseph's hospital, a large academic tertiary hospital in London, Canada. PATIENTS: 150 adult ASA classI-III patients undergoing elective ambulatory elbow surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive either an ultrasound-guided infraclavicular or a supraclavicular block with ropivacaine. MEASUREMENTS: Both groups were assessed for performance and sensory block onset times. Motor block, effective surgical anesthesia, procedure-related pain, axillary nerve block and ulnar nerve sparing were additional outcomes. We analyzed continuous and non-continuous variables with the independent t-test and chi-square test respectively and considered statistical significance when type 1 error was under 0.05. MAIN RESULTS: We observed similar mean block procedure times at 285 (±128) seconds in infra and 307 (±138) seconds in supra group (p = 0.3). The mean time of sensory block onset in both groups was similar: Infra 20.4 (±7.9) and supra 18.9 (±7.1) min (p = 0.4). Conversion to general anesthesia (4.2 vs 5.5%; p = 0.73) and the need for local anesthetic supplement (4.2 vs 4.1%; p = 0.98) was similar in both groups. We observed an increased incidence of paresthesia in the supra group (8.3 vs 23.2%; p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: We found that both blocks were equally effective for elbow surgery with similar procedure and block onset times and failure rates. Lower incidence of paresthesia was associated with the infraclavicular block with no change in other complications compared to the supraclavicular technique.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of supraclavicular and infraclavicular approaches to brachial plexus block for elbow surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, parallel arm, observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: This study occurred in a designated block room at St. Joseph's hospital, a large academic tertiary hospital in London, Canada. PATIENTS: 150 adult ASA class I-III patients undergoing elective ambulatory elbow surgery. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to receive either an ultrasound-guided infraclavicular or a supraclavicular block with ropivacaine. MEASUREMENTS: Both groups were assessed for performance and sensory block onset times. Motor block, effective surgical anesthesia, procedure-related pain, axillary nerve block and ulnar nerve sparing were additional outcomes. We analyzed continuous and non-continuous variables with the independent t-test and chi-square test respectively and considered statistical significance when type 1 error was under 0.05. MAIN RESULTS: We observed similar mean block procedure times at 285 (±128) seconds in infra and 307 (±138) seconds in supra group (p = 0.3). The mean time of sensory block onset in both groups was similar: Infra 20.4 (±7.9) and supra 18.9 (±7.1) min (p = 0.4). Conversion to general anesthesia (4.2 vs 5.5%; p = 0.73) and the need for local anesthetic supplement (4.2 vs 4.1%; p = 0.98) was similar in both groups. We observed an increased incidence of paresthesia in the supra group (8.3 vs 23.2%; p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: We found that both blocks were equally effective for elbow surgery with similar procedure and block onset times and failure rates. Lower incidence of paresthesia was associated with the infraclavicular block with no change in other complications compared to the supraclavicular technique.
Authors: Carl P C Chen; Chih-Chin Hsu; Chih-Hsiu Cheng; Shu-Chun Huang; Jean-Lon Chen; Shin-Yi Lin Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 3.133
Authors: Alan D Kaye; Varsha Allampalli; Paul Fisher; Aaron J Kaye; Aaron Tran; Elyse M Cornett; Farnad Imani; Amber N Edinoff; Soudabeh Djalali Motlagh; Richard D Urman Journal: Anesth Pain Med Date: 2021-10-31
Authors: Trine Kåsine; Luis Romundstad; L A Rosseland; Morten Wang Fagerland; Paul Kessler; Ivar Nagelgaard Omenås; Anne Holmberg; Axel R Sauter Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2020-06-14 Impact factor: 6.288