The Need for Supplemental Blocks in Single Versus Triple Injections in Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Blocks With Medial Approach: A Clinical and an Anatomical Study
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 发起方
- 入组人数
- 139
- 试验地点
- 1
- 主要终点
- Supplemented blocks
研究概览
简要总结
Theoretically, all surgeries below mid-humerus can be done under infraclavicular (IC) blocks. Following the introduction of ultrasonography (USG) to clinical anesthesia, plexus, and nerve blocks under the guidance of USG have gained wide acceptance for the high rates of block success and low risk of complications (1). In this study, the main aim is to evaluate the single injection and triple injection techniques in IC blocks with a USG-guided medial approach in terms of block success and the need for supplementary blocks. The secondary goals are to compare the complication rates and sensory block durations and to discuss the possible reasons for the failure of the blocks.
详细描述
Theoretically all surgeries below mid-humerus can be done under infraclavicular (IC) blocks. Following the introduction of ultrasonography (USG) to the clinical anesthesia, plexus and nerve blocks under the guidance of USG have gained wide acceptance for the high rates of block success, and low risk of complications. At the same time, it was also shown that USG-guided IC blocks can shorten procedural times and accelerate the onset of the blocks.
Several methods for IC blocks have been described. Based on the anatomical knowledge, we hypothesized that in medial approaches the need for supplementary blocks would be low with single injections as well as triple injections. In this study, the main aim is to evaluate the single injection and triple injection techniques in IC blocks with a USG-guided medial approach in terms of block success and the need for supplementary blocks. The secondary goals are to compare the complication rates and sensory block durations and to discuss the possible reasons for the failure of the blocks.
Medical records of 139 patients scheduled for elective or emergent hand, wrist, forearm, elbow, and distal arm surgery were analyzed. Patients older than 14 years with ASA physical status I-III who underwent surgery between October 2017 and March 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Exclusion criteria included non-cooperative patients, refusal of the regional anesthesia, known neuropathy that could prevent the evaluation of the efficacy of the block, different techniques used for infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks (lateral sagittal, coracoid, ...etc.), and known allergy to local anesthetic drugs.
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Observational
- 观察模型
- Cohort
- 时间视角
- Retrospective
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 14 Years 至 —(Child, Adult, Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 否
入选标准
- •ASA physical status I-III
- •upper extremity surgery
- •blocks were performed by the same anesthesiologist
排除标准
- •non-cooperative patients
- •refusal of the regional anesthesia
- •known neuropathy
- •different technique used for infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks (lateral sagittal, coracoid, ...etc.)
- •known allergy to local anesthetic drugs.
结局指标
主要结局
Supplemented blocks
时间窗: 1 hour
30 minutes after the block, if one or two of the median, radial, ulnar or musculocutaneous nerves were still unblocked, these nerves were located either with a peripheric nerve stimulator or an ultrasound, in the axilla or on the more distal parts of their traces on arm and forearm and then supplemented.
次要结局
- Discomfort during IC block(1 hour)
- Complete Failure(30 minutes)
- Recovery of sensory block(24 hours)
- Inadvertent vascular puncture(1 hour)
研究者
Hande Gurbuz
Principal Investigator
Derince Training and Research Hospital
