Effects of hydrodissection on anesthesia characteristics in ultrasound guided infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade.
Journal
Medicine
ISSN: 1536-5964
Titre abrégé: Medicine (Baltimore)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985248R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Jun 2022
10 Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
11
11
2021
accepted:
16
03
2022
entrez:
10
6
2022
pubmed:
11
6
2022
medline:
15
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The development of ultrasonography technology and its widespread application have increased peripheral nerve block applications, especially in limb surgeries, since it reduces complication rates and increases success rates in peripheral nerve block applications. However, even experienced physicians need to direct a large number of needles and injections for adequate local anesthetic spread, which can cause accidental vascular puncture and local anesthetic systemic toxicity. Such complications can be prevented by hydrodissection and a safer and successful anesthesia can be provided to patients in this study, it was aimed to investigate the effects of hydrodissection on anesthesia characteristics in the infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade. Ninety patients were included in our study after approval by the Ethics Committee. These patients were randomly divided into 2 groups (Group I: Infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade with normal method and Group II: infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade with hydrodissection). After obtaining patient consent, monitoring and vascular access were provided. Group I patients were mixed with 30 mL of local anesthetic mixture (15 mL of distilled water and 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine), and Group II patients were treated with 15 mL of distilled water by hydrodissection and 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine anesthesia resident. Block characteristics were evaluated and recorded every 5 minutes for the first 30 minutes by a blinded observer. The sensory block score was 7, the total score was 14 or above, and the block was considered successful, and the patient was ready for surgery. Postoperative block removal times, analgesia, and complications were evaluated and recorded. A significant difference was found between the sensory and motor block onset times and postoperative VAS scores between the normal and hydrodissection groups (P < .05). There were no significant differences in terms of block application times, postoperative block removal times, and complications between the groups. In this study, it has been shown that hydrodissection in peripheral nerve blocks does not lag in terms of block success and characteristics compared to normal methods, whereas anesthetists with less experience in peripheral nerve block experience obtain safer and more successful results in practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The development of ultrasonography technology and its widespread application have increased peripheral nerve block applications, especially in limb surgeries, since it reduces complication rates and increases success rates in peripheral nerve block applications. However, even experienced physicians need to direct a large number of needles and injections for adequate local anesthetic spread, which can cause accidental vascular puncture and local anesthetic systemic toxicity. Such complications can be prevented by hydrodissection and a safer and successful anesthesia can be provided to patients in this study, it was aimed to investigate the effects of hydrodissection on anesthesia characteristics in the infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Ninety patients were included in our study after approval by the Ethics Committee. These patients were randomly divided into 2 groups (Group I: Infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade with normal method and Group II: infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade with hydrodissection). After obtaining patient consent, monitoring and vascular access were provided. Group I patients were mixed with 30 mL of local anesthetic mixture (15 mL of distilled water and 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine), and Group II patients were treated with 15 mL of distilled water by hydrodissection and 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine anesthesia resident. Block characteristics were evaluated and recorded every 5 minutes for the first 30 minutes by a blinded observer. The sensory block score was 7, the total score was 14 or above, and the block was considered successful, and the patient was ready for surgery. Postoperative block removal times, analgesia, and complications were evaluated and recorded.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A significant difference was found between the sensory and motor block onset times and postoperative VAS scores between the normal and hydrodissection groups (P < .05). There were no significant differences in terms of block application times, postoperative block removal times, and complications between the groups.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, it has been shown that hydrodissection in peripheral nerve blocks does not lag in terms of block success and characteristics compared to normal methods, whereas anesthetists with less experience in peripheral nerve block experience obtain safer and more successful results in practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35687774
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000029241
pii: 00005792-202206100-00008
pmc: PMC9276429
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anesthetics, Local
0
Water
059QF0KO0R
Bupivacaine
Y8335394RO
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e29241Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no conflicts of interests to disclose.
Références
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Cousins MJ, Bridenbaugh PO. Neural Blockade in Clinical Anesthesia and Management of Pain. 1998.
Chin KJ, Alakkad H, Adhikary SD, Singh M. Infraclavicular brachial plexus block for regional anaesthesia of the lower arm. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;01–68.
Hussain N, McCartney CJL, Neal JM, Chippor J, Banfield L, Abdallah FW. Local anaesthetic-induced myotoxicity in regional anaesthesia: a systematic review and empirical analysis. Br J Anaesth 2018;121:822–41.
Casati A, Danelli G, Baciarello M, et al. A prospective, randomized comparison between ultrasound and nerve stimulation guidance for multiple injection axillary brachial plexus block. Anesthesiology 2007;106:992–6.
Dufour E, Donat N, Jaziri S, et al. Ultrasound-guided perineural circumferential median nerve block with and without prior dextrose 5% hydrodissection: a prospective randomized double-blinded noninferiority trial. Anesth Analg 2012;115:728–33.
Williams LM, Singh K, Dua A, Singh A, Cummings A. Infraclavicular Nerve Block. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing, Treasure Island (FL); 2021. PMID: 30725701.
Haahr, M. (2010). Random. org: True random number service. School of Computer Science and Statistics, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. Website ( http://www.random.org ). Accessed August 10, 2021.
Baskan S, Camgoz S, Demirelli G, Aytac I, Ornek D. Median ulnar nerve selective blockage versus brachial plexus blockage in carpal tunnel release surgery. Ann Med Res 2019;26:2796–801.
Holmberg A, Sauter A, Klaastad Ø, Draegni T, Raeder J. Pre-operative brachial plexus block compared with an identical block performed at the end of surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomised clinical trial. J Anesth 2017;72:967–77.
Sung Y-T, Wu J-S. The visual analogue scale for rating, ranking and paired-comparison (VAS-RRP): a new technique for psychological measurement. Behav Res Methods 2018;50:1694–715.
Bedforth N, Townsley P, Maybin J, Eisenberg E. Single-handed ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia. J Anesth 2011;66:846–946.
Melnyk V, Ibinson JW, Kentor ML, Orebaugh SL. Updated retrospective single-center comparative analysis of peripheral nerve block complications using landmark peripheral nerve stimulation versus ultrasound guidance as a primary means of nerve localization. J Med Ultrasound 2018;37:2477–88.
Marhofer P, Greher M, Kapral S. Ultrasound guidance in regional anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2005;94:07–17.
Sites B, Gallagher J, Cravero J, Lundberg J, Blike G. The learning curve associated with a simulated ultrasound-guided interventional task by inexperienced anesthesia residents. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2004;29:544–8.
Chan VW, Perlas A, Rawson R, Odukoya O. Ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg 2003;97:1514–7.
Garnier T, Bloc S, Mercadal L, Ecoffey C, Dhonneur G. Hydrolocalization during ultrasound guided regional anesthesia. Anesthesiology 2007;107:A639.
Bloc S, Narchi P, Garnier T, et al. 392 apprenticeship of the hydrolocalization technique applied to ultrasound guided regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2008;33:e67–167.
Bloc S, Ecoffey C, Dhonneur G. Controlling needle tip progression during ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia using the hydrolocalization technique. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2008;33:382–3.
Ginosar Y, Weiniger C, Meroz Y, et al. Pulse oximeter perfusion index as an early indicator of sympathectomy after epidural anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009;53:1018–26.
Bloc S, Mercadal L, Dessieux T, et al. The learning process of the hydrolocalization technique performed during ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2010;54:421–5.
Rajpal G, Winger D, Cortazzo M, Kentor M, Orebaugh S. Neurologic outcomes after low-volume, ultrasound-guided interscalene block and ambulatory shoulder surgery. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2016;41:477–81.