Standardizing nomenclature in regional anesthesia: an ASRA-ESRA Delphi consensus study of upper and lower limb nerve blocks.

BACKGROUND: Inconsistent nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques hinder scientific communication and engender confusion; this in turn has implications for research, education and clinical implementation of regional anesthesia. Having produced standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques, we aimed to similarly do so for upper and lower limb peripheral nerve blocks. METHODS: We performed a three-round Delphi international consensus study to generate standardized names and anatomical descriptions of upper and lower limb regional anesthetic techniques. A long list of names and anatomical description of blocks of upper and lower extremities was produced by the members of the steering committee. Subsequently, two rounds of anonymized voting and commenting were followed by a third virtual round table to secure consensus for items that remained outstanding after the first and second rounds. As with previous methodology, strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94, 91 and 65 collaborators participated in the first, second and third rounds, respectively. We achieved strong consensus for 38 names and 33 anatomical descriptions, and weak consensus for five anatomical descriptions. We agreed on a template for naming peripheral nerve blocks based on the name of the nerve and the anatomical location of the blockade and identified several areas for future research. CONCLUSIONS: We achieved consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques for upper and lower limb nerve blocks, and recommend using this framework in clinical and academic practice. This should improve research, teaching and learning of regional anesthesia to eventually improve patient care.

Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. METHODS: Following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. RESULTS: Seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. CONCLUSION: By means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia.

Standardizing nomenclature in regional anesthesia: an ASRA-ESRA Delphi consensus study of abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall blocks.

BACKGROUND: There is heterogeneity in the names and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques. This may have adverse consequences on education, research, and implementation into clinical practice. We aimed to produce standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques. METHODS: We conducted an international consensus study involving experts using a three-round Delphi method to produce a list of names and corresponding descriptions of anatomical targets. After long-list formulation by a Steering Committee, the first and second rounds involved anonymous electronic voting and commenting, with the third round involving a virtual round table discussion aiming to achieve consensus on items that had yet to achieve it. Novel names were presented where required for anatomical clarity and harmonization. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50% to 74% agreement. RESULTS: Sixty expert Collaborators participated in this study. After three rounds and clarification, harmonization, and introduction of novel nomenclature, strong consensus was achieved for the names of 16 block names and weak consensus for four names. For anatomical descriptions, strong consensus was achieved for 19 blocks and weak consensus was achieved for one approach. Several areas requiring further research were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Harmonization and standardization of nomenclature may improve education, research, and ultimately patient care. We present the first international consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of blocks of the abdominal wall, chest wall, and paraspinal blocks. We recommend using the consensus results in academic and clinical practice.

Anatomical considerations for obturator nerve block with fascia iliaca compartment block.

This report reviews the topographical and functional anatomy relevant for assessing whether or not the obturator nerve (ON) can be anesthetized using a fascia iliaca compartment (FIC) block. The ON does not cross the FIC. This means that the ON would only be blocked by an FIC block if the injectate spreads to the ON outside of the FIC. Such a phenomena would require the creation of one or more artificial passageways to the ON in the retro-psoas compartment or the retroperitoneal compartment by disrupting the normal anatomical integrity of the FI. Due to this requirement for an artificial pathway, an FIC block probably does not block the ON.

Microinvasive Carpal Tunnel Release Using a Retractable Needle-Mounted Blade.

We report 166 microinvasive ultrasound-guided carpal tunnel releases using the MICROi-Blade (Summit Medical Products, Inc, Sandy, UT), a needle-based tool for cutting under ultrasound guidance. The 6-month follow-up of the first 21 cases, including 5 bilateral releases, showed a progressive reduction in median pain scores, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) Symptom Severity Scale scores, and BCTQ Functional Status Scale scores. The median return to work was 7 days. The 3-month follow-up of 62 subsequent cases showed similar improvement in the BCTQ scores and return to work. There were no complications. This report supports the effectiveness of the technique.

Ultrasound-Guided Microinvasive Carpal Tunnel Release Using a Novel Retractable Needle-Mounted Blade: A Cadaveric Study.

Ultrasound (US)-guided microinvasive procedures are defined as those performed via needles without notable scarring. Ten cadaver hands underwent US-guided microinvasive carpal tunnel release using a novel needle-based tool, the micro i-Blade (Summit Medical Products, Inc, Sandy, UT). A US-imaged landmark, the inflexion point of the ligaments distal to the hook of the hamate, was used to position the distal extent of the cut. The transverse carpal ligament was successfully released in all hands without damage to nerves or arteries. In 3 specimens, the fascia between the thenar and hypothenar muscles was partly preserved, whereas the palmar aponeurosis was partly cut in 1 specimen. The micro i-Blade with the cutting knife retracted was also useful as a probe palpated through the palm of the cadaver hand, to test the release of the transverse carpal ligament and to guide the procedure.

Ultrasound-guided continuous oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane blockade: description of anatomy and clinical technique.

BACKGROUND: Recently, ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane blockade for abdominal wall analgesia has been described, and it involves injection of local anesthetic into the transversus abdominis plane. The posterior approach involves injection of local anesthetic in the lateral abdominal wall between the costal margin and the iliac crest and is suitable for postoperative analgesia after surgery below the umbilicus. The subcostal approach is suitable after abdominal surgery in the periumbilical region. The subcostal block can be modified, and the needle can be introduced along the oblique subcostal line from the xyphoid process toward the anterior part of the iliac crest. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this brief technical report was to describe in detail the anatomy and the technique of continuous oblique subcostal blockade. The goal of this approach was to produce a wider sensory blockade suitable for analgesia after surgery both superior and inferior to the umbilicus. CONCLUSIONS: A catheter can be placed along the oblique subcostal line in the transversus abdominis plane for continuous infusion of local anesthetic. Multimodal analgesia and intravenous opioid are used in addition because visceral pain is not blocked. Continuous oblique subcostal transversus abdominis plane block is a new technique and requires both a detailed knowledge of sonographic anatomy and technical skill for it to be successful.