RESUMEN
Purpose: Ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block (UGBPB) has interscalene, supraclavicular, infraclavicular, and axillary approaches. The axillary block is considered to be the safest and with fewer adverse events compared to the interscalene (eg, phrenic nerve block, spinal cord or vertebral artery puncture) and supraclavicular (eg, pneumothorax). However, with regard to postoperative neurological symptoms (PONS), it is controversial whether its incidence after an axillary block was higher than that after non-axillary approaches". In this study, we investigated whether the incidence of a neuropathy after an axillary block was higher than that after non-axillary approaches. Patients and Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study. All UGBPBs were performed under general anesthesia between January 2014 and March 2020. The outcomes included the overall incidence of PONS and neuropathies for axillary and non-axillary approaches. The etiology, symptoms, and outcomes of patients were investigated. Results: Of the 992 patients, 143 (14%) and 849 (86%) were subjected to axillary and non-axillary approaches, respectively. Among 19 cases (19.2:1000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 18.2-20.1) of PONS, four (4.0:1000; 95% CI, 3.8-4.2) were neuropathies attributed to the UGBPB, three (21.0:1000; 95% CI, 18.1-23.8) to the axillary and one (2.8:1000; 95% CI, 2.6-3.1) to non-axillary approaches. The incidence of neuropathies after an axillary block was significantly higher than that after non-axillary approaches (P = 0.005). Conclusion: The incidence of neuropathies after US-guided axillary block under general anesthesia was significantly higher than that after non-axillary approaches.
RESUMEN
The last three years have been spent combating COVID-19, and governments have been seeking optimal solutions to minimize the negative impacts on societies. Although two types of testing have been performed for this-follow-up testing for those who had close contact with infected individuals and mass-testing of those with symptoms-the allocation of resources has been controversial. Mathematical models such as the susceptible, infectious, exposed, recovered, and dead (SEIRD) model have been developed to predict the spread of infection. However, these models do not consider the effects of testing characteristics and resource limitations. To determine the optimal testing strategy, we developed a testing-SEIRD model that depends on testing characteristics and limited resources. In this model, people who test positive are admitted to the hospital based on capacity and medical resources. Using this model, we examined the infection spread depending on the ratio of follow-up and mass-testing. The simulations demonstrated that the infection dynamics exhibit an all-or-none response as infection expands or extinguishes. Optimal and worst follow-up and mass-testing combinations were determined depending on the total resources and cost ratio of the two types of testing. Furthermore, we demonstrated that the cumulative deaths varied significantly by hundreds to thousands of times depending on the testing strategy, which is encouraging for policymakers. Therefore, our model might provide guidelines for testing strategies in the cases of recently emerging infectious diseases.
