Continuous Popliteal Sciatic Blocks: Does Varying Perineural Catheter Location Relative to the Sciatic Bifurcation Influence Block Effects? A Dual-Center, Randomized, Subject-Masked, Controlled Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have demonstrated that, for single-injection popliteal sciatic nerve blocks, block characteristics are dependent upon local anesthetic injection relative to the sciatic nerve bifurcation. In contrast, this relation remains unexamined for continuous popliteal sciatic nerve blocks. We, therefore, tested the hypothesis that postoperative analgesia is improved with the perineural catheter tip at the level of the bifurcation compared with 5 cm proximal to the bifurcation. METHODS: Preoperatively, subjects having moderately painful foot or ankle surgery were randomly assigned to receive an ultrasound-guided subepimyseal perineural catheter inserted either at or 5 cm proximal to the sciatic nerve bifurcation. Subjects received a single injection of mepivacaine 1.5% either via the insertion needle preoperatively or the perineural catheter postoperatively, followed by an infusion of ropivacaine 0.2% (6 mL/h basal, 4 mL bolus, and 30-min lockout) for the study duration. The primary end point was the average pain measured on a numeric rating scale (0-10) in the 3 hours before a data collection telephone call the morning after surgery. RESULTS: The average numeric rating scale of subjects with a catheter inserted at the sciatic nerve bifurcation (n = 64) was a median (10th, 25th to 75th, and 90th quartiles) of 3.0 (0.0, 2.4-5.0, and 7.0) vs 2.0 (0.0, 1.0-4.0, and 5.0) for subjects with a catheter inserted proximal to the bifurcation (n = 64; P = 0.008). Similarly, maximum pain scores were greater in the group at the bifurcation: 6.0 (3.0, 4.4-8.0, and 9.0) vs 5.0 (0.0, 3.0-8.0, and 10.0) (P = 0.019). Differences between the groups for catheter insertion time, opioid rescue dose, degree of numbness in the foot/toes, catheter dislodgement, and fluid leakage did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: For continuous popliteal sciatic nerve blocks, a catheter inserted 5 cm proximal to the sciatic nerve bifurcation provides superior postoperative analgesia in subjects having moderately painful foot or ankle surgery compared with catheters located at the bifurcation. This is in marked contrast with single-injection popliteal sciatic nerve blocks for which benefits are afforded to local anesthetic injection distal, rather than proximal, to the bifurcation.

Persistent postmastectomy pain and pain-related physical and emotional functioning with and without a continuous paravertebral nerve block: a prospective 1-year follow-up assessment of a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: In a previous randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study, the authors demonstrated that extending a single-injection paravertebral nerve block with a multiple-day perineural local anesthetic infusion improves analgesia and decreases pain-related dysfunction during the 3-day infusion but not subsequent to catheter removal within 1 month after mastectomy. This report describes a prospective follow-up study of the previously published trial to investigate the possibility that extending a single-injection paravertebral block with a multiple-day infusion may decrease persistent postsurgical pain as well as pain-induced emotional and functional dysfunction 1 year after mastectomy. METHODS: Subjects undergoing uni- or bilateral mastectomy received unilateral (n = 24) or bilateral (n = 36) single-injection thoracic paravertebral block(s) with ropivacaine and perineural catheter(s). The subjects were randomized to receive either ropivacaine 0.4 % (n = 30) or normal saline (n = 30) via their catheters until the catheters were removed on postoperative day 3. Chronic pain and pain-related physical and emotional dysfunction were measured using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). RESULTS: No statistically significant difference between treatments 3 months after surgery was observed with the BPI. In contrast, after 12 months, only 4 subjects (13 %) who had received a perineural ropivacaine infusion reported pain-induced dysfunction compared with 14 (47 %) who had received saline infusion (P = 0.011). At 12 months, the mean BPI was 1.6 ± 4.6 for the subjects who received ropivacaine versus 5.9 ± 11.3 for the subjects who received saline (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Adding a multiple-day, continuous ropivacaine infusion to a single-injection ropivacaine paravertebral nerve block may result in a lower incidence of pain as well as pain-related physical and emotional dysfunction 1 year after mastectomy.

Continuous transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks for postoperative pain control after hernia surgery: a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Single-injection transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block provides postoperative analgesia and decreases supplemental analgesic requirements. However, there is currently no evidence from randomized, controlled studies investigating the possible benefits of continuous TAP blocks. Therefore, the aim of this randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study was to determine if benefits are afforded by adding a multiple-day, ambulatory, continuous ropivacaine TAP block to a single-injection block following hernia surgery. METHODS: Preoperatively, subjects undergoing unilateral inguinal (N=19) or peri-umbilical (N=1) hernia surgery received unilateral or bilateral TAP perineural catheter(s), respectively. All received a ropivacaine 0.5% (20 mL) bolus via the catheter(s). Subjects were randomized to either postoperative perineural ropivacaine 0.2% or normal saline using portable infusion pump(s). Subjects were discharged home where the catheter(s) were removed the evening of postoperative day (POD) 2. Subjects were contacted on POD 0-3. The primary endpoint was average pain with movement (scale: 0-10) queried on POD 1. RESULTS: Twenty subjects of a target 30 were enrolled due to the primary surgeon's unanticipated departure from the institution. Average pain queried on POD 1 for subjects receiving ropivacaine (N=10) was a mean (standard deviation) of 3.0 (2.6) vs 2.8 (2.7) for subjects receiving saline (N=10; 95% confidence interval difference in means -2.9 to 3.4; P=0.86). There were no statistically significant differences detected between treatment groups in any secondary endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not support adding an ambulatory, continuous ropivacaine infusion to a single-injection ropivacaine TAP block for hernia surgery. However, the present investigation was underpowered, and further study is warranted.

Continuous femoral nerve blocks: the impact of catheter tip location relative to the femoral nerve (anterior versus posterior) on quadriceps weakness and cutaneous sensory block.

BACKGROUND: During a continuous femoral nerve block, the influence of catheter tip position relative to the femoral nerve on infusion characteristics remains unknown. METHODS: We inserted bilateral femoral perineural catheters in volunteers (ultrasound-guided, needle in-plane). Subjects' dominant side was randomized to have the catheter tip placed either anterior or posterior to the femoral nerve. The contralateral limb received the alternative position. Ropivacaine 0.1% was administered through both catheters concurrently for 6 hours (4 mL/h). Outcome measures included the maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of the quadriceps femoris muscle and tolerance to cutaneous electrical current over to the distal quadriceps tendon. Measurements were performed at hour 0 (baseline), and on the hour until hour 9, as well as hour 22. The primary end point was the MVIC of the quadriceps at hour 6. RESULTS: As a percentage of the baseline measurement, quadriceps MVIC for limbs with anterior (n = 16) and posterior (n = 16) catheter tip placement did not differ to a statistically significant degree at hour 6 (mean [SD] 29% [26] vs 30% [28], respectively; 95% confidence interval: -22% to 20%; P = 0.931), or at any other time point. However, the maximum tolerance to cutaneous electrical current was higher in limbs with anterior compared with posterior catheter tip placement at hour 6 (20 [23] mA vs 6 [4] mA, respectively; 95% confidence interval: 1-27 mA; P = 0.035), as well as at hours 1, 7, 8, and 9 (P < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This study documents the significant (70%-80%) quadriceps femoris weakness induced by a continuous femoral nerve block infusion at a relatively low dose of ropivacaine (4 mg/h) delivered through a perineural catheter located both anterior and posterior to the femoral nerve. In contrast, an anterior placement increases cutaneous sensory block compared with a posterior insertion, without a concurrent relative increase in motor block.

Continuous femoral nerve blocks: varying local anesthetic delivery method (bolus versus basal) to minimize quadriceps motor block while maintaining sensory block.

BACKGROUND: Whether the method of local anesthetic administration for continuous femoral nerve blocks--basal infusion versus repeated hourly bolus doses--influences block effects remains unknown. METHODS: Bilateral femoral perineural catheters were inserted in volunteers (n = 11). Ropivacaine 0.1% was concurrently administered through both catheters: a 6-h continuous 5 ml/h basal infusion on one side and 6 hourly bolus doses on the contralateral side. The primary endpoint was the maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) of the quadriceps femoris muscle at hour 6. Secondary endpoints included quadriceps MVIC at other time points, hip adductor MVIC, and cutaneous sensation 2 cm medial to the distal quadriceps tendon in the 22 h after initiation of local anesthetic administration. RESULTS: Quadriceps MVIC for limbs receiving 0.1% ropivacaine as a basal infusion declined by a mean (SD) of 84% (19) compared with 83% (24) for those receiving 0.1% ropivacaine as repeated bolus doses between baseline and hour 6 (paired t test P = 0.91). Intrasubject comparisons (left vs. right) also reflected a lack of difference: the mean basal-bolus difference in quadriceps MVIC at hour 6 was -1.1% (95% CI -22.0-19.8%). The similarity did not reach the a priori threshold for concluding equivalence, which was the 95% CI decreasing within ± 20%. There were similar minimal differences in the secondary endpoints during local anesthetic administration. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not find evidence to support the hypothesis that varying the method of local anesthetic administration--basal infusion versus repeated bolus doses--influences continuous femoral nerve block effects to a clinically significant degree.

Continuous femoral versus posterior lumbar plexus nerve blocks for analgesia after hip arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroplasty frequently requires potent postoperative analgesia, often provided with an epidural or posterior lumbar plexus local anesthetic infusion. However, American Society of Regional Anesthesia guidelines now recommend against epidural and continuous posterior lumbar plexus blocks during administration of various perioperative anticoagulants often administered after hip arthroplasty. A continuous femoral nerve block is a possible analgesic alternative, but whether it provides comparable analgesia to a continuous posterior lumbar plexus block after hip arthroplasty remains unclear. We therefore tested the hypothesis that differing the catheter insertion site (femoral versus posterior lumbar plexus) after hip arthroplasty has no impact on postoperative analgesia. METHODS: Preoperatively, subjects undergoing hip arthroplasty were randomly assigned to receive either a femoral or a posterior lumbar plexus stimulating catheter inserted 5 to 15 cm or 0 to 1 cm past the needle tip, respectively. Postoperatively, patients received perineural ropivacaine, 0.2% (basal 6 mL/hr, bolus 4 mL, 30-minute lockout) for at least 2 days. The primary end point was the average daily pain scores as measured with a numeric rating scale (0-10) recorded in the 24-hour period beginning at 07:30 the morning after surgery, excluding twice-daily physical therapy sessions. Secondary end points included pain during physical therapy, ambulatory distance, and supplemental analgesic requirements during the same 24-hour period, as well as satisfaction with analgesia during hospitalization. RESULTS: The mean (SD) pain scores for subjects receiving a femoral infusion (n = 25) were 3.6 (1.8) versus 3.5 (1.8) for patients receiving a posterior lumbar plexus infusion (n = 22), resulting in a group difference of 0.1 (95% confidence interval -0.9 to 1.2; P = 0.78). Because the confidence interval was within a prespecified -1.6 to 1.6 range, we conclude that the effect of the 2 analgesic techniques on postoperative pain was equivalent. Similarly, we detected no differences between the 2 treatments with respect to the secondary end points, with one exception: subjects with a femoral catheter ambulated a median (10th-90th percentiles) 2 (0-17) m the morning after surgery, in comparison with 11 (0-31) m for subjects with a posterior lumbar plexus catheter (data nonparametric; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: After hip arthroplasty, a continuous femoral nerve block is an acceptable analgesic alternative to a continuous posterior lumbar plexus block when using a stimulating perineural catheter. However, early ambulatory ability suffers with a femoral infusion.

Localizing the Pain: Continuous Paravertebral Nerve Blockade in a Patient with Acute Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND Acute pancreatitis is the leading gastrointestinal cause of hospitalization in the United States. The associated pain, for which opioids are commonly prescribed, can result in complications of respiratory dysfunction secondary to impaired abdominal wall movement. Paravertebral nerve blockade has shown substantial efficacy in treatment of abdominal and thoracic pain, but its utility for pancreatitis pain and role in reducing hospital length of stay and narcotic use has not been well studied. CASE REPORT A 41-year-old woman with longstanding history of recurrent pancreatitis controlled with celiac plexus blocks and oxycodone was admitted for severe left upper quadrant abdominal pain. The patient was admitted, made NPO, and started on IV morphine. She underwent a left-sided T12-L1 paravertebral single shot injection and catheter placement, and experienced immediate relief. A Marcaine infusion was continued for 3 days and the patient required no additional narcotics while the catheter was in place. On hospital day 6, the catheter was removed and the patient was discharged. CONCLUSIONS Our case illustrates the successful use of continuous thoracic paravertebral nerve blockade in a patient with pancreatitis. This intervention resulted in a significant reduction in narcotic requirements. As the number of hospitalizations and mean cost for acute pancreatitis has increased over the years despite an in-house mortality decrease, targeting cost reduction via length of stay reductions is key. Optimizing pain management in these patients is one way in which we can reduce LOS and thereby cost. We believe paravertebral nerve blockade is a viable analgesic option worth exploring in this patient population.

Comparative efficacy of ultrasound-guided and stimulating popliteal-sciatic perineural catheters for postoperative analgesia.

PURPOSE: Perineural catheter insertion using ultrasound guidance alone is a relatively new approach. Previous studies have shown that ultrasound-guided catheters take less time to place with high placement success rates, but the analgesic efficacy compared with the established stimulating catheter technique remains unknown. We tested the hypothesis that popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter insertion relying exclusively on ultrasound guidance results in superior postoperative analgesia compared with stimulating catheters. METHODS: Preoperatively, subjects receiving a popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter for foot or ankle surgery were assigned randomly to either ultrasound guidance (bolus via needle with non-stimulating catheter insertion) or electrical stimulation (bolus via catheter). We used 1.5% mepivacaine 40 mL for the primary surgical nerve block and 0.2% ropivacaine (basal 8 mL·hr(-1); bolus 4 mL; 30 min lockout) was infused postoperatively. The primary outcome was average surgical pain on postoperative day one. RESULTS: Forty of the 80 subjects enrolled were randomized to each treatment group. One of 40 subjects (2.5%) in the ultrasound group failed catheter placement per protocol vs nine of 40 (22.5%) in the stimulating catheter group (P = 0.014). The difference in procedural duration (mean [95% confidence interval (CI)]) was -6.48 (-9.90 - -3.05) min, with ultrasound requiring 7.0 (4.0-14.1) min vs stimulation requiring 11.0 (5.0-30.0) min (P < 0.001). The average pain scores of subjects who provided data on postoperative day one were somewhat higher for the 33 ultrasound subjects than for the 26 stimulation subjects (5.0 [1.0-7.8] vs 3.0 [0.0-6.5], respectively; P = 0.032), a difference (mean [95%CI]) of 1.37 (0.03-2.71). CONCLUSION: For popliteal-sciatic perineural catheters, ultrasound guidance takes less time and results in fewer placement failures compared with stimulating catheters. However, analgesia may be mildly improved with successfully placed stimulating catheters. Clinical trial registration number NCT00876681.

A trainee-based randomized comparison of stimulating interscalene perineural catheters with a new technique using ultrasound guidance alone.

OBJECTIVE: Compared to the well-established stimulating catheter technique, the use of ultrasound guidance alone for interscalene perineural catheter insertion is a recent development and has not yet been examined in a randomized fashion. We hypothesized that an ultrasound-guided technique would require less time and produce equivalent results compared to electrical stimulation (ES) when trainees attempt interscalene perineural catheter placement. METHODS: Preoperatively, patients receiving an interscalene perineural catheter for shoulder surgery were randomly assigned to an insertion protocol using either ultrasound guidance with a nonstimulating catheter or ES with a stimulating catheter. The primary outcome was the procedural duration (in minutes), starting when the ultrasound probe (ultrasound group) or catheter insertion needle (ES group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter insertion needle was removed after catheter insertion. RESULTS: All ultrasound-guided catheters (n = 20) were placed successfully and resulted in surgical anesthesia versus 85% of ES-guided catheters (n = 20; P = .231). Perineural catheters placed by ultrasound (n = 20) took a median (10th-90th percentiles) of 8.0 (5.0-15.5) minutes compared to 14.0 (5.0-30.0) minutes for ES (n = 20; P = .022). All catheters placed according to the protocol in both treatment groups resulted in a successful nerve block; however, 1 patient in the ES group had local anesthetic spread to the epidural space. There was 1 vascular puncture using ultrasound guidance compared to 5 in the ES-guided catheter group (P = .182). CONCLUSIONS: Trainees using a new ultrasound-guided technique can place inter-scalene perineural catheters in less time compared to a well-documented technique using ES with a stimulating catheter and can produce equivalent results.

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus block via an ultrasound-guided posterior approach: a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The posterior approach for placing continuous interscalene catheters has not been studied in a controlled investigation. In this randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study, we tested the hypothesis that an ultrasound-guided continuous posterior interscalene block provides superior postoperative analgesia compared to a single-injection ropivacaine interscalene block after moderately painful shoulder surgery. METHODS: Preoperatively, subjects received a stimulating interscalene catheter using an ultrasound-guided, in-plane posterior approach. All subjects received an initial bolus of ropivacaine. Postoperatively, subjects were discharged with oral analgesics and a portable infusion device containing either ropivacaine 0.2% or normal saline programmed to deliver a perineural infusion over 2 days. The primary outcome was average pain on postoperative day (POD) 1 (scale: 0-10). Secondary outcomes included least and worst pain scores, oral opioid requirements, sleep disturbances, patient satisfaction, and incidence of complications. RESULTS: Of the 32 subjects enrolled, 30 perineural catheters were placed per protocol. Continuous ropivacaine perineural infusion (n = 15) produced a statistically and clinically significant reduction in average pain (median [10th-90th percentile]) on POD 1 compared with saline infusion (n = 15) after initial ropivacaine bolus (0.0 [0.0-5.0] versus 3.0 [0.0-6.0], respectively; P < 0.001). Median oral opioid consumption (oxycodone) was lower in the ropivacaine group than in the placebo group on POD 1 (P = 0.002) and POD 2 (P = 0.002). Subjects who received a ropivacaine infusion suffered fewer sleep disturbances than those in the placebo group (P = 0.005 on POD 0 and 1 nights) and rated their satisfaction with analgesia higher than subjects who received normal saline (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a single-injection interscalene block, a 2-day continuous posterior interscalene block provides greater pain relief, minimizes supplemental opioid requirements, greatly improves sleep quality, and increases patient satisfaction after moderate-to-severe painful outpatient shoulder surgery.

Ultrasound guidance versus electrical stimulation for femoral perineural catheter insertion.

OBJECTIVE: Continuous femoral nerve blocks provide potent analgesia and other benefits after knee surgery. Perineural catheter placement techniques using ultrasound guidance and electrical stimulation (ES) have been described, but the optimal method remains undetermined. We tested the hypothesis that ultrasound guidance alone requires less time for femoral perineural catheter insertion and produces equivalent results compared with ES alone. METHODS: Preoperatively, patients receiving a femoral perineural catheter for knee surgery were randomly assigned to either ultrasound guidance with a nonstimulating catheter or ES with a stimulating catheter. The primary outcome was the catheter placement procedure time (minutes) starting when the ultrasound transducer (ultrasound group) or catheter insertion needle (ES group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter insertion needle was removed after catheter insertion. RESULTS: Perineural catheters placed with ultrasound guidance (n = 20) took a median (10th-90th percentiles) of 5.0 (3.9-10.0) minutes compared with 8.5 (4.8-30.0) minutes for ES (n = 20; P = .012). All ultrasound-guided catheters were placed according to the protocol (n = 20) versus 85% of ES-guided catheters (n = 20; P = .086). Patients in the ultrasound group had a median procedure-related discomfort score of 0.5 (0.0-3.1) compared with 2.5 (0.0-7.6) for the ES group (P = .015). There were no vascular punctures with ultrasound guidance versus 4 in the ES group (P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: Placement of femoral perineural catheters takes less time with ultrasound guidance compared with ES. In addition, ultrasound guidance produces less procedure-related pain and prevents inadvertent vascular puncture.

Ultrasound guidance versus electrical stimulation for infraclavicular brachial plexus perineural catheter insertion.

OBJECTIVE: Electrical stimulation (ES)- and ultrasound-guided placement techniques have been described for infraclavicular brachial plexus perineural catheters but to our knowledge have never been previously compared in a randomized fashion, leaving the optimal method undetermined. We tested the hypothesis that infraclavicular catheters placed via ultrasound guidance alone require less time for placement and produce equivalent results compared with catheters placed solely via ES. METHODS: Preoperatively, patients receiving an infraclavicular perineural catheter for distal upper extremity surgery were randomly assigned to either ES with a stimulating catheter or ultrasound guidance with a nonstimulating catheter. The primary outcome was the catheter insertion duration (minutes) starting when the ultrasound transducer (ultrasound group) or catheter placement needle (stimulation group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter placement needle was removed after catheter insertion. RESULTS: Perineural catheters placed with ultrasound guidance took a median (10th-90th percentile) of 9.0 (6.0-13.2) minutes compared with 15.0 (4.9-30.0) minutes for stimulation (P < .01). All ultrasound-guided catheters were successfully placed according to the protocol (n = 20) versus 70% in the stimulation group (n = 20; P < .01). All ultrasound-guided catheters resulted in a successful surgical block, whereas 2 catheters placed by stimulation failed to result in surgical anesthesia. Six catheters (30%) placed via stimulation resulted in vascular punctures compared with none in the ultrasound group (P < .01). Procedure-related pain scores were similar between groups (P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: Placement of infraclavicular perineural catheters takes less time, is more often successful, and results in fewer inadvertent vascular punctures when using ultrasound guidance compared with ES.

Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Cryoneurolysis for Acute Pain Management: A Case Report.

We report 3 different cases in which ultrasound-guided percutaneous cryoneurolysis was performed to treat acute pain: 1 patient with refractory incisional pain after percutaneous nephrolithotomy; 1 patient with burns to the foot; and 1 patient with pain from iliac crest grafting. Acute pain associated with surgery or injury is a challenge to treat with local anesthetic-based regional anesthesia techniques when the anticipated pain duration exceeds a few days. Cryoneurolysis is an alternative analgesic method that utilizes extremely cold temperatures to reversibly ablate peripheral nerves and is potentially a novel method for acute pain management.

Use of ultrasonography as a rescue technique for failed radial artery cannulation.

Radial artery cannulation may be unsuccessful in the most experienced of hands using the conventional palpation method. Repeated attempts may render the standard wrist site difficult to cannulate due to vasospasm, hematoma formation, or intimal dissection. Cannulation of other arterial sites may be difficult due to inaccessibility or more prone to adverse outcomes. The radial artery at a proximal location runs deep to the brachioradialis muscle and is difficult to palpate; however, it can be easily imaged using real-time ultrasonography. A needle-mounted cannula can then be advanced in the plane of the probe and the pulsating artery until the needle tip is within the artery. The cannula is advanced over the needle so that it lies within the arterial lumen. As the trajectory is in full view of the ultrasound probe, the technique has a very high success rate. We have used ultrasonography in over 30 cases as a rescue technique after unsuccessful attempts at radial artery cannulation. The technique is described here illustrated with 3 typical cases.

Ultrasound-guided airway blocks using a curvilinear probe.

We describe a novel technique of real-time ultrasound-guided superior laryngeal nerve and translaryngeal blocks in 4 patients with anticipated difficult airways. All patients had altered neck anatomy, and 1 had a prior unsuccessful awake fiberoptic bronchoscopic intubation. For block performance, an 11-mm broadband curved array transducer with a scanning frequency between 8 and 5 MHz (Sonosite, Bothell, WA) was used for anatomical structure identification, needle guidance toward each superior laryngeal nerve and through the cricothyroid membrane, and deposition of local anesthetic in the appropriate location. This was followed by successful awake fiberoptic bronchoscopic endotracheal intubation in all cases.

Treatment of postmastectomy pain with ambulatory continuous paravertebral nerve blocks: a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine with this randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study if benefits are afforded by adding a multiple-day, ambulatory, continuous ropivacaine paravertebral nerve block to a single-injection ropivacaine paravertebral block after mastectomy. METHODS: Preoperatively, 60 subjects undergoing unilateral (n = 24) or bilateral (n = 36) mastectomy received either unilateral or bilateral paravertebral perineural catheter(s), respectively, inserted between the third and fourth thoracic transverse process(es). All subjects received an initial bolus of ropivacaine 0.5% (15 mL) via the catheter(s). Subjects were randomized to receive either perineural ropivacaine 0.4% or normal saline using portable infusion pump(s) [5 mL/h basal; 300 mL reservoir(s)]. Subjects remained hospitalized for at least 1 night and were subsequently discharged home where the catheter(s) were removed on postoperative day (POD) 3. Subjects were contacted by telephone on PODs 1, 4, 8, and 28. The primary end point was average pain (scale, 0-10) queried on POD 1. RESULTS: Average pain queried on POD 1 for subjects receiving perineural ropivacaine (n = 30) was a median (interquartile) of 2 (0-3), compared with 4 (1-5) for subjects receiving saline (n = 30; 95% confidence interval difference in medians, -4.0 to -0.3; P = 0.021]. During this same period, subjects receiving ropivacaine experienced a lower severity of breakthrough pain (5 [3-6] vs 7 [5-8]; P = 0.046) as well. As a result, subjects receiving perineural ropivacaine experienced less pain-induced physical and emotional dysfunction, as measured with the Brief Pain Inventory (lower score = less dysfunction): 14 (4-37) versus 57 (8-67) for subjects receiving perineural saline (P = 0.012). For the subscale that measures the degree of interference of pain on 7 domains, such as general activity and relationships, subjects receiving perineural saline reported a median score 10 times higher (more dysfunction) than those receiving ropivacaine (3 [0-24] vs 33 [0-44]; P = 0.035). In contrast, after infusion discontinuation, there were no statistically significant differences detected between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: After mastectomy, adding a multiple-day, ambulatory, continuous ropivacaine infusion to a single-injection ropivacaine paravertebral nerve block results in improved analgesia and less functional deficit during the infusion. However, no benefits were identified after infusion discontinuation.

Ultrasound-guided root/trunk (interscalene) block for hand and forearm anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Historically, the anterolateral interscalene block--deposition of local anesthetic adjacent to the brachial plexus roots/trunks--has been used for surgical procedures involving the shoulder. The resulting block frequently failed to provide surgical anesthesia of the hand and forearm, even though the brachial plexus at this level included all of the axons of the upper-extremity terminal nerves. However, it remains unknown whether deposition of local anesthetic adjacent to the seventh cervical root or inferior trunk results in anesthesia of the hand and forearm. METHODS: Using ultrasound guidance and a needle-in-plane posterior approach, a Tuohy needle was positioned with the tip located between the deepest and next-deepest visualized brachial plexus root/trunk, followed by injection of mepivacaine (1.5%). Grip strength and the tolerance to cutaneous electrical current in 5 terminal nerve distributions were measured at baseline and then every 5 minutes following injection for a total of 30 minutes. The primary end point was the proportion of cases in which the interscalene nerve block resulted in a decrease in grip strength of at least 90% and hand and forearm anesthesia (tolerance to >50 mA of current in all 5 terminal nerve distributions) within 30 minutes. The primary hypothesis was that a single-injection interscalene brachial plexus block produces a similar rate of anesthesia of the hand and forearm to the published success rate of 95% for other brachial plexus block approaches. RESULTS: Of 55 subjects with blocks placed per protocol, all had a successful block of the shoulder as defined by inability to abduct at the shoulder joint. Thirty-three subjects had measurements at 30 minutes following local anesthetic deposition, and only 5 (15%) of these subjects had a surgical block of the hand and forearm (P < 0.0001; 95% confidence interval, 6%-33%). We therefore reject the hypothesis that the interscalene block as performed in this study provides equivalent anesthesia to the hand and forearm compared with other brachial plexus block techniques. Block failures of the hand and forearm were due to inadequate cutaneous anesthesia of the ulnar (n = 27; 82%), median (n = 26; 78%), or radial (n = 22; 67%) distributions; the medial forearm (n = 25; 76%); and/or the lateral forearm (n = 14; 42%). Failure to achieve at least a 90% reduction in grip strength occurred in 16 subjects (48%). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not find evidence to support the hypothesis that local anesthetic injected adjacent to the deepest brachial plexus roots/trunks reliably results in surgical anesthesia of the hand and forearm.