Patient-Reported Quality of Recovery after Local Anesthesia versus Brachial Plexus Block in Hand Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Both local anesthesia (LA) and brachial plexus (BP) anesthesia are commonly used in hand surgery. LA has increased efficiency and reduced costs, but BP is often favored for more complex hand surgery, despite requiring greater time and resources. The primary objective of this study was to assess the quality of recovery of patients who received LA or BP block for hand surgery. Secondary objectives were to compare postoperative pain and opioid use. METHODS: This randomized, controlled, noninferiority study enrolled patients undergoing surgery distal to the carpal bones. Patients were randomized to either LA (wrist or digital block) or BP block (infraclavicular block) before surgery. Patients completed the Quality of Recovery-15 questionnaire on postoperative day (POD) 1. Pain level was assessed with a numeric pain rating scale, and narcotic consumption was recorded on POD1 and POD3. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients completed the study (LA, n = 46, BP, n = 30). No statistically significant difference was found for median Quality of Recovery-15 score between LA [127.5 (interquartile range, 28)] and BP block [123.5 (interquartile range, 31)]. The inferiority margin of LA to BP block at the 95% confidence interval was less than the minimal clinically important difference of 8, demonstrating noninferiority of LA compared with BP block. There was no statistically significant difference between LA and BP block for numeric pain rating scale scores or narcotic consumption on POD1 and POD3 ( P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: LA is noninferior to BP block for hand surgery with regard to patient-reported quality of recovery, postoperative pain, and narcotic use. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

A randomized comparison between costoclavicular and paracoracoid ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block for upper limb surgery.

BACKGROUND: This two-centre randomized trial compared costoclavicular and paracoracoid ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block in patients undergoing upper limb surgery. We hypothesized that both techniques would result in similar onset times and designed the study as an equivalence trial. METHODS: Ninety patients undergoing upper limb surgery at or distal to the elbow were randomly allocated to receive a costoclavicular (n = 45) or paracoracoid (n = 45) ultrasound-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block. Both groups received a 35-mL mixture of 1% lidocaine-0.25% bupivacaine with epinephrine 5 µg·mL-1. In the costoclavicular group, local anesthetic was injected into the costoclavicular space in the middle of the three cords of the brachial plexus. In the paracoracoid group, local anesthetic was deposited dorsal to the axillary artery in the lateral infraclavicular fossa. A blinded observer recorded the block onset time (primary endpoint), success rate (i.e., surgical anesthesia), block-related pain scores, as well as the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. Performance time and the number of needle passes were also recorded during the performance of the block. The total anesthesia-related time was defined as the sum of the performance and onset times. RESULTS: The mean (SD) onset times were comparable between the costoclavicular and paracoracoid groups [16.0 (7.5) min vs 16.8 (6.2) min, respectively; mean difference, 0.8; 95% confidence interval, -2.3 to 3.8; P = 0.61]. Furthermore, no intergroup differences were found in terms of performance time (P = 0.09), total anesthesia-related time (P = 0.90), surgical anesthesia (P > 0.99), and hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (P > 0.99). The paracoracoid technique required marginally fewer median [interquartile range] needle passes than the costoclavicular technique (2 [1-4] vs 2 [1-6], respectively; P = 0.048); however, procedural pain was comparable between the two study groups. CONCLUSION: Costoclavicular and paracoracoid ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks resulted in similar onset times. Furthermore, no intergroup differences were found in terms of performance times and success rates. Future dose-finding trials are required to elucidate the minimum effective volume of local anesthetic for costoclavicular infraclavicular blocks. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.in.th (Study ID: TCTR20160525001).

Diaphragm-Sparing Nerve Blocks for Shoulder Surgery.

Shoulder surgery can result in significant postoperative pain. Interscalene brachial plexus blocks (ISBs) constitute the current criterion standard for analgesia but may be contraindicated in patients with pulmonary pathology due to the inherent risk of phrenic nerve block and symptomatic hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. Although ultrasound-guided ISB with small volumes (5 mL), dilute local anesthetic (LA) concentrations, and LA injection 4 mm lateral to the brachial plexus have been shown to reduce the risk of phrenic nerve block, no single intervention can decrease its incidence below 20%. Ultrasound-guided supraclavicular blocks with LA injection posterolateral to the brachial plexus may anesthetize the shoulder without incidental diaphragmatic dysfunction, but further confirmatory trials are required. Ultrasound-guided C7 root blocks also seem to offer an attractive, diaphragm-sparing alternative to ISB. However, additional large-scale studies are needed to confirm their efficacy and to quantify the risk of periforaminal vascular breach. Combined axillary-suprascapular nerve blocks may provide adequate postoperative analgesia for minor shoulder surgery but do not compare favorably to ISB for major surgical procedures. One intriguing solution lies in the combined use of infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks and suprascapular nerve blocks. Theoretically, the infraclavicular approach targets the posterior and lateral cords, thus anesthetizing the axillary nerve (which supplies the anterior and posterior shoulder joint), as well as the subscapular and lateral pectoral nerves (both of which supply the anterior shoulder joint), whereas the suprascapular nerve block anesthetizes the posterior shoulder. Future randomized trials are required to validate the efficacy of combined infraclavicular-suprascapular blocks for shoulder surgery.

A randomized comparison between intravenous and perineural dexamethasone for ultrasound-guided axillary block.

BACKGROUND: This randomized double-blinded trial compared the effect of intravenous and perineural dexamethasone (8 mg) on the duration of motor block for ultrasound (US)-guided axillary brachial plexus block (AXB). METHODS: Patients undergoing upper limb surgery with US-guided AXB were randomly allocated to receive preservative-free dexamethasone (8 mg) via intravenous (n = 75) or perineural (n = 75) administration. The local anesthetic agent, 1% lidocaine -0.25% bupivacaine (30 mL) with epinephrine 5 µg·mL-1, was identical in all subjects. Operators and patients were blinded to the nature of the intravenous and perineural injectate. A blinded observer assessed the block success rate (i.e., a minimal sensorimotor composite score of 14 out of 16 points at 30 min), block onset time, as well as the presence of surgical anesthesia. Postoperatively, the blinded observer contacted all patients with successful blocks to record the duration of motor block (primary outcome), sensory block, and postoperative analgesia. RESULTS: No intergroup differences were observed in terms of success rate, surgical anesthesia, and block onset time. Compared to intravenous administration, perineural dexamethasone provided longer mean (SD) durations for motor block [17.5 (4.6) hr vs 12.8 (4.5) hr; mean difference, 4.6 hr; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.21 to -3.08; P < 0.001], sensory block [17.7 (5.1) hr vs 13.7 (5.0) hr; mean difference, 4.0 hr; 95% CI, -5.77 to -2.27; P < 0.001], and postoperative analgesia [21.1 (4.6) hr vs 17.1 (4.6) hr; mean difference, 4.0 hr; 95% CI, -5.70 to -2.30; P < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Compared to intravenous dosing, perineural dexamethasone (8 mg) results in longer durations of sensorimotor block and postoperative analgesia for ultrasound-guided axillary block. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT02629835.

Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Medial Branch Radiofrequency Neurotomy: Can Multitined Deployment Cannulae Be the Solution?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Novel multitined cannulae constitute an attractive option for ultrasound-guided radiofrequency neurotomy of cervical medial branches. The deployment tines increase the cannula's active area, thus altering its lesion size. Despite their theoretical benefits, multitined cannulae have not been assessed. In this bench study, we sought to investigate the lesions produced by a standard 18-gauge and 2 commercially available multitined deployment cannulae. We created ex vivo models to evaluate lesion morphology at a periosteal interface using approach angles likely to be encountered during an ultrasound-guided technique. METHODS: Two ex vivo models were assembled using chicken breast tissue and bovine tibia. Monopolar lesions were carried out with 3 commercially available cannulae (18-gauge curved [S], 17-gauge with laterally deploying tines [N], and 18-gauge with distally deploying tines [T]). All cannulae were positioned at 0, 25, 45, and 90 degrees to the periosteal plane. For each angulation and cannula, 2 series of measurements were recorded to document lesion morphology in the axial and sagittal planes. Data collected included the lesion's surface area, shape, and dimensions relative to the needle tip. RESULTS: A total of 240 lesions were analyzed. The performances of S and N cannulae were significantly affected by approach angle, with lesion size decreasing as the angle increased. In contrast, T cannulae displayed similar lesion surface areas at 0 and 90 degrees. The multitined N and T cannulae produced the largest lesions at 0/25 and 90 degrees, respectively. Lesion height varied inversely according to approach angle for S and N cannulae, whereas T cannulae displayed stable characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike their S and N counterparts, T cannulae demonstrated stable lesion characteristics at varying approach angles.

Primary Failure of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Training Centers: The Invisible Elephant?

In teaching centers, primary failure of thoracic epidural analgesia can be due to multiple etiologies. In addition to the difficult anatomy of the thoracic spine, the conventional end point-loss-of-resistance-lacks specificity. Furthermore, insufficient training compounds the problem: learning curves are nonexistent, pedagogical requirements are often inadequate, supervisors may be inexperienced, and exposure during residency is decreasing. Any viable solution needs to be multifaceted. Learning curves should be explored to determine the minimal number of blocks required for proficiency. The problem of decreasing caseload can be tackled with epidural simulators to supplement in vivo learning. From a technical standpoint, fluoroscopy and ultrasonography could be used to navigate the complex anatomy of the thoracic spine. Finally, correct identification of the thoracic epidural space should be confirmed with objective, real-time modalities such as neurostimulation and waveform analysis.

A Multicenter Randomized Comparison Between Intravenous and Perineural Dexamethasone for Ultrasound-Guided Infraclavicular Block.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This multicenter, randomized trial compared intravenous (IV) and perineural (PN) dexamethasone for ultrasound (US)-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block. Our research hypothesis was both modalities would result in similar durations of motor block. METHODS: One hundred fifty patients undergoing upper limb surgery with US-guided infraclavicular block were randomly allocated to receive IV or PN dexamethasone (5 mg). The local anesthetic agent (35 mL of lidocaine 1%-bupivacaine 0.25% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL) was identical in all subjects. Patients and operators were blinded to the nature of IV and PN injectates. During the performance of the block, the performance time, number of needle passes, procedural pain, and complications (vascular puncture, paresthesia) were recorded.Subsequently, a blinded observer assessed the success rate (defined as a minimal sensorimotor composite score of 14 of 16 points at 30 minutes), onset time as well as the incidence of surgical anesthesia (defined as the ability to complete surgery without local infiltration, supplemental blocks, IV opioids, or general anesthesia). Postoperatively (at 24 hours), the blinded observer contacted patients with successful blocks to enquire about the duration of motor block, sensory block, and postoperative analgesia. The main outcome variable was the duration of motor block. RESULTS: No intergroup differences were observed in terms of technical execution (performance time/number of needle passes/procedural pain/complications), onset time, success rate, and surgical anesthesia. However, compared to its IV counterpart, PN dexamethasone provided 19% to 22% longer durations for motor block (15.7 ± 6.2 vs 12.9 ± 5.5 hours; P = 0.009), sensory block (16.8 ± 4.4 vs 13.9 ± 5.4 hours; P = 0.002), and postoperative analgesia (22.1 ± 8.5 vs 18.6 ± 6.7 hours; P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with its IV counterpart, PN dexamethasone (5 mg) provides a longer duration of motor block, sensory block, and postoperative analgesia for US-guided infraclavicular block. Future dose-finding studies are required to elucidate the optimal dose of dexamethasone.

A Randomized Comparison Between Conventional and Waveform-Confirmed Loss of Resistance for Thoracic Epidural Blocks.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Epidural waveform analysis (EWA) provides a simple confirmatory adjunct for loss of resistance (LOR): when the needle tip is correctly positioned inside the epidural space, pressure measurement results in a pulsatile waveform. In this randomized trial, we compared conventional and EWA-confirmed LOR in 2 teaching centers. Our research hypothesis was that EWA-confirmed LOR would decrease the failure rate of thoracic epidural blocks. METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing thoracic epidural blocks for thoracic surgery, abdominal surgery, or rib fractures were randomized to conventional LOR or EWA-LOR. The operator was allowed as many attempts as necessary to achieve a satisfactory LOR (by feel) in the conventional group. In the EWA-LOR group, LOR was confirmed by connecting the epidural needle to a pressure transducer using a rigid extension tubing. Positive waveforms indicated that the needle tip was positioned inside the epidural space. The operator was allowed a maximum of 3 different intervertebral levels to obtain a positive waveform. If waveforms were still absent at the third level, the operator simply accepted LOR as the technical end point. However, the patient was retained in the EWA-LOR group (intent-to-treat analysis).After achieving a satisfactory tactile LOR (conventional group), positive waveforms (EWA-LOR group), or a third intervertebral level with LOR but no waveform (EWA-LOR group), the operator administered a 4-mL test dose of lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL. Fifteen minutes after the test dose, a blinded investigator assessed the patient for sensory block to ice. RESULTS: Compared with LOR, EWA-LOR resulted in a lower rate of primary failure (2% vs 24%; P = 0.002). Subgroup analysis based on experience level reveals that EWA-LOR outperformed conventional LOR for novice (P = 0.001) but not expert operators. The performance time was longer in the EWA-LOR group (11.2 ± 6.2 vs 8.0 ± 4.6 minutes; P = 0.006). Both groups were comparable in terms of operator's level of expertise, depth of the epidural space, approach, and LOR medium. In the EWA-LOR group, operators obtained a pulsatile waveform with the first level attempted in 60% of patients. However, 40% of subjects required performance at a second or third level. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with its conventional counterpart, EWA-confirmed LOR results in a lower failure rate for thoracic epidural blocks (2% vs 24%) in our teaching centers. Confirmatory EWA provides significant benefits for inexperienced operators.

Real-Time Detection of Periforaminal Vessels in the Cervical Spine: An Ultrasound Survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Compared with the thoracic and lumbar spine, transforaminal epidural injections and medial branch blocks in the cervical spine are associated with a higher incidence of neurological complications. Accidental breach of small periforaminal arteries has been implicated in many instances. In this observational study, using ultrasonography, we surveyed the incidence of periforaminal bloods vessels in the cervical spine. METHODS: Patients undergoing ultrasound-guided cervical medial branch blocks were scanned using color power and pulsed wave Doppler. Five levels from C2/C3 to C6/C7 were studied. Incidental blood vessels located between the anterior tubercles of the transverses process and the posterior borders of the articular pillars were included for analysis. We recorded the diameter and position of arteries relative to contiguous bony landmarks as well the number of veins. RESULTS: In 102 patients, we performed a total 201 scans (1005 cervical levels). Of the 363 incidental vessels identified, 238 were arteries (mean diameter, 1.25 ± 0.45 mm). The latter were most commonly found at the posterior foraminal aspects of C5, C6, and C7 (13%, 11%, and 16% of scans, respectively); the transverse processes of C5 and C6 (10% and 16% of scans, respectively); and the articular pillars of C6 and C7 (19% and 16% of scans, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Small periforaminal arteries are prevalent along the lateral aspect of the cervical spine, adjacent to areas commonly targeted by nerve block procedures. Further trials are required to determine if ultrasound guidance can reduce the incidence of complications related to accidental vascular breach.

A randomized trial comparing axillary block versus targeted intracluster injection supraclavicular block for upper limb surgery.

PURPOSE: This randomized trial aimed to validate a new method for brachial plexus blockade, i.e., targeted intracluster injection supraclavicular block (TII SCB), by comparing it with ultrasound-guided axillary block (AXB). We hypothesized that TII SCB would result in a shorter total anesthesia-related time. METHODS: Forty patients undergoing upper limb surgery were randomized to ultrasound-guided TII SCB (n = 20) or AXB (n = 20). In the TII SCB group, we deposited 16 mL of lidocaine 1.5% with epinephrine 5 µg·mL(-1) into the largest neural cluster (i.e., brachial plexus trunks/divisions). Subsequently, an additional 16 mL was divided into equal aliquots and injected inside each satellite cluster. In the AXB group, 5.5 mL were deposited around the musculocutaneous nerve and 23.5 mL were injected at the 6 o'clock position of the axillary artery. The main outcome for comparison between the two groups was the total anesthesia-related time (defined as the sum of block performance and onset times). We also recorded the number of needle passes, procedural pain, and complications (vascular puncture, paresthesia). RESULTS: The TII SCB method provided a quicker mean (SD) onset time compared with the AXB group [9.5 (5.8) min vs 18.9 (6.1) min; mean difference, -9.5 min; 99% CI, -14.7 to -4.2; P < 0.001] and a shorter mean (SD) total anesthesia-related time [20.1 (5.0) min vs 27.2 (6.5) min; mean difference, -7.0 min; 95% CI, -10.9 to -3.1; P = 0.001]. There were no intergroup differences in terms of success rate (95%), procedural pain, vascular puncture and paresthesia. The AXB group displayed a faster performance time [8.2 (1.6) min vs 10.6 (2.6) min; P = 0.001] with fewer median [interquartile range] needle passes (3 [2-6] vs 5 [4-8]; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided TII SCB provides a quicker onset and a shorter total anesthesia-related time than ultrasound-guided AXB.

Reliability of Waveform Analysis as an Adjunct to Loss of Resistance for Thoracic Epidural Blocks.

BACKGROUND: The epidural space is most commonly identified with loss of resistance (LOR). Although sensitive, LOR lacks specificity, as cysts in interspinous ligaments, gaps in ligamentum flavum, paravertebral muscles, thoracic paravertebral spaces, and intermuscular planes can yield nonepidural LOR. Epidural waveform analysis (EWA) provides a simple confirmatory adjunct for LOR. When the needle is correctly positioned inside the epidural space, measurement of the pressure at its tip results in a pulsatile waveform. In this observational study, we set out to assess the sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values of EWA for thoracic epidural blocks. METHODS: We enrolled a convenience sample of 160 patients undergoing thoracic epidural blocks for thoracic surgery, abdominal surgery, or rib fractures. The choice of patient position (sitting or lateral decubitus), approach (midline or paramedian), and LOR medium (air or normal saline) was left to the operator (attending anesthesiologist, fellow, or resident). After obtaining a satisfactory LOR, the operator injected 5 mL of normal saline through the epidural needle. A sterile tubing, connected to a pressure transducer, was attached to the needle to measure the pressure at the needle tip. A 4-mL bolus of lidocaine 2% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL was then administered and, after 10 minutes, the patient was assessed for sensory blockade to ice. RESULTS: The failure rate (incorrect identification of the epidural space with LOR) was 23.1%. Of these 37 failed epidural blocks, 27 provided no sensory anesthesia at 10 minutes. In 10 subjects, the operator was unable to thread the catheter through the needle. When compared with the ice test, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of EWA were 91.1%, 83.8%, 94.9%, and 73.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Epidural waveform analysis (with pressure transduction through the needle) provides a simple adjunct to LOR for thoracic epidural blocks. Although its use was devoid of complications, further confirmatory studies are required before its routine implementation in clinical practice.

A Randomized Comparison Between Single- and Triple-Injection Subparaneural Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This prospective randomized trial compared ultrasound-guided single-injection (SI) and triple-injection (TI) subparaneural popliteal sciatic nerve block. We hypothesized that multiple injections are not required when local anesthetic (LA) is deposited under the paraneurium because the latter entraps LA molecules, ensuring circumferential spread around the nerve. Therefore, in addition to comparable success rates, we also expected similar total anesthesia-related times (sum of performance and onset times) and designed this study as an equivalency trial. METHODS: Ultrasound-guided subparaneural posterior popliteal sciatic nerve block was carried out in 100 patients. In the SI group, LA was deposited at a single location between the tibial and peroneal nerves. In the TI group, LA was injected between the tibial and peroneal divisions, medial to the tibial nerve, and lateral to the common peroneal nerve. The total LA volume (15 mL) and mixture (lidocaine 1%-bupivacaine 0.25%-epinephrine 5 µg/mL) were identical in all subjects. The performance time, number of needle passes, and adverse events (paresthesia, neural edema) were recorded by the (nonblinded) investigator supervising the block. A blinded observer evaluated the success rate (sensorimotor composite score ≥6/8 points at 30 minutes) as well as the onset time and contacted patients 7 days after the surgery to inquire about persistent numbness or motor deficit. RESULTS: Both techniques provided comparable success rates (92%) and total anesthesia-related times (17.1-19.7 minutes). Expectedly, the SI group required fewer needle passes (1 vs 3; P < 0.001) and a shorter needling time (3.0 ± 2.3 minutes vs 4.0 ± 2.3 minutes; P = 0.025). The TI group displayed a shorter onset time (12.5 ± 7.9 minutes vs 15.8 ± 7.9 minutes; P = 0.027). The performance time, procedural discomfort, and incidence of paresthesia (14%-20%) were similar between the 2 groups. Sonographic neural swelling was detected in 2 subjects in the SI group. In both cases, the needle was carefully withdrawn and the injection was completed uneventfully. Follow-up of the 100 subjects 1 week after surgery revealed no residual numbness or motor deficit. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided SI and TI subparaneural popliteal sciatic nerve blocks result in comparable success rates and total anesthesia-related times. Expectedly, the SI technique requires fewer needle passes.

A randomized comparison between ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided c7 medial branch block.

BACKGROUND: Because of its location in the lower neck and anatomical variability, the C7 medial branch represents a challenging target for local anesthetic blocks. Although ultrasound (US) guidance offers an alternative to fluoroscopy for C3 to C6 cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs), its use at the C7 level has not been examined. We hypothesized that US, using a biplanar imaging technique, could provide a shorter performance time than conventional fluoroscopy for C7 CMBB. METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing C7 CMBB were randomized to fluoroscopy or US guidance. A 0.6-mL mixture of local anesthetic and radiographic contrast was injected in both groups. The primary outcome was performance time. Secondary outcomes included success rate, pain levels preblock and postblock, and incidences of aberrant spread and procedure-related complications. RESULTS: Compared to fluoroscopy, US guidance was associated with a shorter performance time (233.6 ± 80.4 vs 390.6 ± 142.4 seconds; P < 0.001) and fewer needle passes (2 vs 4; P < 0.001). However, both imaging modalities provided similar success rates (92%-96%). Furthermore, no intergroup differences were found in preblock and postblock pain scores. In the fluoroscopy group, intravascular and intra-articular spreads were seen in 20% and 4% of cases, respectively. In the US group, a blood vessel was visualized overlying the target area and successfully avoided during needle insertion in 40% of patients. No procedure-related complications occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guidance using a biplanar approach provides a similar success rate to fluoroscopy for C7 CMBB. However, US is associated with improved efficiency (decreased performance time and fewer needle passes).

A randomized comparison between infraclavicular block and targeted intracluster injection supraclavicular block.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This prospective, randomized trial compared ultrasound-guided targeted intracluster injection (TII) supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SCB) and infraclavicular brachial plexus block (ICB). METHODS: Sixty-four patients were randomly allocated to receive an ultrasound-guided TII SCB (n = 32) or ICB (n = 32). The local anesthetic agent (lidocaine 1.5% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL) was identical in all subjects. In the TII SCB group, half the volume (16 mL) was injected inside the largest neural cluster (confluence of trunks and divisions of the brachial plexus). Subsequently, the remaining half (16 mL) was divided into equal aliquots and injected inside every single satellite cluster. In the ICB group, the entire volume (35 mL) was injected dorsal to the axillary artery. During the performance of the block, the performance time, number of needle passes, procedural pain, and complications (vascular puncture, paresthesia) were recorded. Subsequently, a blinded observer assessed the onset time, incidence of Horner syndrome, and success rate (surgical anesthesia). The main outcome variable was the total anesthesia-related time (sum of performance and onset times). RESULTS: Due to a quicker onset [8.9 (5.6) vs 17.6 (5.3) minutes; P < 0.001], the total anesthesia-related time was shorter with TII SCB [18.2 (6.1) vs 22.8 (5.3) minutes; P < 0.001]. However no differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of success rate (93.7%-96.9%), block-related pain scores, and adverse events such as vascular puncture and paresthesia. Expectedly, the ICB group required fewer needle passes (2 vs 6; P < 0.001) as well as shorter needling [4.8 (2.3) vs 9.0 (2.9) minutes; P < 0.001] and performance [5.6 (2.3) vs 9.5 (2.9) minutes; P < 0.001] times. Moreover, the ICB approach was associated with a decreased incidence of Horner syndrome (3.1% vs 53.1%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided TII SCB and ICB provide comparable success rates. Due to its quick onset, TII SCB results in a shorter total anesthesia-related time.

Dose-finding methodology for peripheral nerve blocks.

Dose-finding studies enable the successful conduct of peripheral nerve blocks by ensuring the administration of appropriate doses of local anesthetic. However, the optimal dose-finding methodology remains ambiguous. In this research methodology article, we set out to review the basic aspects pertaining to dose-response curves (graded vs quantal), the pharmacodynamic indices required by dose-finding studies, the properties of different dose-finding methods (sigmoidal dose-response curve analysis, Dixon-Mood method, Biased Coin Design, and Bayesian analysis), as well as strategies and recommendations for future research.

A randomized comparison between double-injection and targeted intracluster-injection ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block.

BACKGROUND: In this prospective, randomized, observer-blinded study, we compared double-injection (DI) ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block to a novel targeted intracluster-injection (TII) technique, whereby local anesthetic is injected inside the main and satellite neural clusters (confluences of trunks and divisions of the brachial plexus). METHODS: Ninety patients were randomly allocated to receive a DI (n = 45) or TII (n = 45) technique for ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block. The local anesthetic drug (lidocaine 1.5% with epinephrine 5 µg/mL) and total volume (32 mL) were identical in all subjects. In both groups, half the volume (16 mL) was injected inside the main neural cluster. For the DI technique, the second half (16 mL) was deposited at the "corner pocket" (intersection of the first rib and subclavian artery). In contrast, for the TII technique, the remaining half was divided into equal aliquots and injected inside every single satellite cluster. The main outcome variable was the total anesthesia-related time (sum of performance and onset times). RESULTS: Due to a quicker onset (mean ± standard deviation (SD): 10.1 ± 6.4 vs 18.5 ± 8.3 minutes; P < 0.0001), the total anesthesia-related time was shorter with the TII technique (21.2 ± 7.7 vs 27.7 ± 9.0 minutes; P = 0.001; 95% confidence interval for the difference of the means: 2.90-10.08 minutes). There were 0 (of 45) and 3 (of 45) surgical failures for the TII and DI group, respectively. Thus, the 2 methods achieved comparable rates of surgical anesthesia (93.3%-100.0%; 95% confidence interval for the difference of the success rates: -2.3% to 17.9%). No intergroup differences were observed in block-related pain scores and adverse events. The DI group required fewer needle passes (median ± interquartile range: 4 ± 2 vs 7 ± 3; P < 0.0001) as well as shorter needling (8.4 ± 2.9 vs 10.7 ± 2.7 minutes; P < 0.0001) and performance (9.0 ± 3.2 vs 11.2 ± 3.0 minutes; P = 0.001) times. CONCLUSION: Although DI and TII ultrasound-guided supraclavicular blocks seem to provide comparable success rates, we cannot exclude the possibility that an intergroup difference of 17.9% might have gone undetected. Due to its quick onset, the TII technique results in a shorter total anesthesia-related time.

A prospective validation of biplanar ultrasound imaging for C5-C6 cervical medial branch blocks.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound (US) guidance offers an alternative to fluoroscopy for medial branch blocks of the upper cervical spine, but it may be less accurate for blocks at the C5 and C6 levels. We hypothesized that a modified technique using biplanar US imaging would facilitate level identification and provide greater accuracy for the lower cervical spine. METHODS: Forty patients with chronic neck pain underwent US-guided blocks of the C5 and C6 medial branches. For each level, 0.3 mL of a local anesthetic/iodinated contrast mixture was injected. Posterolateral in-plane needle placement was carried out in a transverse view, and the position of the needle tip was verified in the coronal plane using the C7 transverse process as a sonographic landmark. Contrast distribution, as assessed by a blinded observer on anteroposterior and lateral x-ray views, constituted the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were performance time and pain relief 30 minutes after the blocks. RESULTS: One hundred percent and 97.5% of C5 and C6 levels, respectively, demonstrated appropriate contrast distribution. The C7 transverse process was readily identified in the coronal plane in all but 2 subjects. Performance time was 248.8 ± 82.7 seconds; the mean percentage of relief provided by the blocks was 76.9% ± 25.5%. In 30% of patients, a blood vessel was visualized crossing the C6 articular pillar and successfully avoided during needle insertion. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guidance using a biplanar approach is a reliable imaging modality for C5 and C6 medial branch blocks.