RESUMO
The scalp nerve block, created by injecting local anesthetics around the scalp nerves, is reported to effectively reduce pain after surgery. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of scalp nerve block in patients with hemifacial spasm (HFS) undergoing microvascular decompression (MVD). Seventy-four patients who underwent MVD for HFS were enrolled. The block group received scalp nerve block with 0.5% ropivacaine before surgery. The primary outcome was cumulative dose of rescue analgesics 24 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were included pain scores, postoperative antiemetic consumption, and Quality of Recovery-15 scale. The cumulative dose of rescue analgesics at 24 h postoperatively was not significantly different between the two groups (4.80 ± 3.64 mg vs. 5.92 ± 3.95 mg, p = 0.633). However, the pain score was significantly reduced in the block group at 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively. Postoperative antiemetic consumption was lower in the block group than the control group at 12 h. There were no significant differences between the two groups for other secondary outcomes. In MVD for HFS, a preoperative scalp nerve block might reduce postoperative pain in the early postoperative period, but a larger study using a multimodal approach is needed to confirm the efficacy of a scalp block.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, S1 transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) has been performed using an anteroposterior (AP) fluoroscopic view. In 2007, the oblique "Scotty dog" (OS) approach was introduced as an alternative technique. We compared passage time of the needle into S1 foramen (Tf) between the anteroposterior (AP) and oblique "Scotty dog" (OS) approach during S1 TFESI. METHODS: In this prospective randomized controlled trial, seventy patients scheduled S1 TFESI were randomly allocated into AP or OS groups. In the AP group, a slight cephalad-caudad tilt was used. In the OS group, the C-arm was rotated ipsilateral oblique degrees to view the S1 Scotty dog. Both groups received injection of steroid mixed with local anesthetics. We measured the passage time of the needle into S1 foramen (Tf), primary outcome, and total procedure time (Tt) between the groups. We also recorded presence of intravascular injection, patients-assessed pain relief for one month and complications. RESULTS: The Tf and Tt were shorter in the OS than in the AP group (24.4â±â24.0âs vs 47. 8â±â53.2seconds; 93.3â±â35.0âseconds vs 160.0â±â98.7âseconds, Pâ<â.001, both). Incidence of intravascular injection (AP, 8 [22.8%]; OS, 4 [11.4%], Pâ=â.205), pain score, and complication rates were not statistically different between the two groups. In logistic regression analysis, the body mass index (BMI) was a risk factor for longer Tt (odds ratio [OR]â=â1.27, 95% CI: 1.02-1.58, Pâ=â.030). CONCLUSION: The passage time of the needle into S1 foramen was shorter in OS approach and the OS approach reduced the procedure time compared with the AP approach during S1 TFESI. The practitioners should note that procedure time can be prolonged in obese patients.