Combination of real-time needle-tip pressure sensing and minimal intensity stimulation limits unintentional intraneural injection during an ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block procedure: A randomized, parallel group, controlled trial.

Injection pressure Intraneural injection Monitoring Nerve stimulation Peripheral nerve block Safety Ultrasound

Journal

Journal of clinical anesthesia
ISSN: 1873-4529
Titre abrégé: J Clin Anesth
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8812166

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2021
Historique:
received: 16 02 2021
revised: 03 06 2021
accepted: 09 06 2021
pubmed: 26 6 2021
medline: 24 12 2021
entrez: 25 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Ultrasound guidance does not eliminate the risk of intraneural injection, which must be avoided during PNB. Combining ultrasound guidance (USG), nerve stimulation (NS), and injection pressure monitoring is advocated to prevent nerve injury during PNB. We hypothesized that combining patient-tailored dynamic NS and real-time pressure sensing (RTPS) could reduce the incidence of intraneural injection and nerve puncture during USG PNB compared with a traditional fixed thresholds (Control) procedure. Randomized, prospective study. Operating room. One hundred ASA physical status I to III patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. Patient anesthetized using axillary, sciatic or femoral USG PNB were randomized to the PresStim group (Dynamic RTPS and NS set at 1.5 mA then decreased; n = 50) or Control group (fixed thresholds for in-line pressure mechanical manometer and NS at 0.2 mA; n = 50). Procedural ultrasound images and videos were recorded, stored and reviewed in random order by two experts in ultrasound-guided PNB blinded to the group. They noted the needle-to-nerve relationship and intraneural injection for all blocked nerves. One hundred and twenty-three USG PNBs were performed (56 axillary brachial plexus blocks, 40 femoral nerve blocks and 27 sciatic popliteal nerve blocks); 235 blocked nerves and videos were recorded and analyzed (PresStim, 118; Control, 117). Less paresthesia was noted in the PresStim group (12.7%) compared with the Control group (18.8%). The risk of intraneural injection was significantly higher in the Control group (odds ratio [OR], 17.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-135, P = 0.007). The risk of nerve puncture (OR, 22.7; 95% CI, 2.9-175, p = 0.003) and needle-nerve contact (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 2.4-9.5, p < 0.001) was significantly higher in the Control group than the PresStim group. Under the conditions of the study, dynamic triple monitoring combining RTPS, NS and USG decreases intraneural injection and unintentional needle-nerve contact and puncture during a PNB procedure.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34171709
pii: S0952-8180(21)00260-9
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110420
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

110420

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Adrien Coudray (A)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Olivier Choquet (O)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Fabien Swisser (F)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Mark Hochman (M)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France; Department of Restorative Dentistry, Stony Brook School of Dental Medicine, NY, New York, United States of America.

Sophie Bringuier (S)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France; Department of Medical Statistics, Montpellier University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Xavier Capdevila (X)

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Lapeyronie University Hospital, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France; Inserm Unit 1051 Montpellier NeuroSciences Institute, Montpellier University, 34295 Montpellier Cedex 5, France. Electronic address: x-capdevila@chu-montpellier.fr.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH