Modified abaxial sesamoid nerve block provides enhanced proximal diffusion compared to basisesamoid block and lower proximal diffusion than traditional low plantar nerve block in equine hind limbs: ex vivo and in vivo study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the proximal diffusion distance of radiopaque contrast medium and mepivacaine/methylene blue solution and incidence of inadvertent intrasynovial and intravascular injections of modified sesamoid nerve block (MASB) when compared with traditional plantar nerve analgesia techniques of the equine distal hind limb. SAMPLE: Ex vivo model: 18 hind limbs; and in vivo model: 5 horses in a crossover study. METHODS: In the ex vivo model, a mepivacaine/methylene blue solution was used to compare the diffusion distance between MASB, basisesamoid block (BSB), and traditional low plantar block (TLPB). Ten minutes after injection, skin was dissected and proximal diffusion distance of the dye patch was measured. In the in vivo model, both hind limbs were injected with radiopaque contrast medium with either MASB or TLPB. Ten minutes after injection, a radiograph was acquired and the proximal diffusion of the contrast medium patch was measured. RESULTS: In the ex vivo model, solution proximal diffusion distance for MASB was significantly longer than BSB (P < .050) and significantly shorter than TLPB (P < .050). Both techniques reached the proximal aspect of DFTS similarly (P = .289), and no difference in the incidence of intrasynovial or intravascular injections was observed (P = .292). In the in vivo model, contrast medium proximal diffusion of MASB was significantly shorter than TLPB (P < .050). The proportion of injections that diffused subcutaneously to the proximal aspect of the proximal pouch of the DFTS was not significantly different between techniques (P = .136). No difference in the incidence of DFTS intrasynovial or intravascular injections was observed (P = .305). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MASB presented significantly more proximal diffusion than BSB and less proximal diffusion than TLPB, consistently reached the proximal aspect of DFTS, and presented a very low risk of intrasynovial and intravascular injections.

Objective evaluation for analgesia of the distal interphalangeal joint, the navicular bursa and perineural analgesia in horses with naturally occurring forelimb lameness localised to the foot.

BACKGROUND: The outcome and interpretation of intra-synovial diagnostic analgesia of the distal interphalangeal joint (DIPJ) and the navicular bursa (NB) remain in dispute, and no objective studies have been carried out to establish the percentage of improvement over time from these two analgesia techniques. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the qualitative and time-dependent outcome of DIPJ-A and NB-A in naturally occurring forelimb lameness. STUDY DESIGN: Case series. METHODS: Twenty-three clinical cases with forelimb lameness were evaluated objectively using a body mounted inertial sensor system (BMIS). Lameness was localised to the foot with a palmar digital nerve block and/or an abaxial sesamoidean nerve block on day 1, and analgesia of the DIPJ (DIPJ-A) and NB (NB-A) were performed on days 2 and 3. Improvement following perineural analgesia was measured after 10 min and intra-synovial blocks after 2-, 5- and 10-min. Horses with at least 70% improvement measured objectively after diagnostic analgesia were included in the study. RESULTS: There was no significant association between improvement following perineural analgesia and the DIPJ-A and NB-A. The mean improvement in the lameness differed between DIPJ-A and NB-A at 2 min (p < 0.001) and at 5 min (p = 0.04), and it was no longer observed after 10 min (p = 0.06). A positive NB-A produced a high degree of improvement that remained stable, whereas the DIPJ-A improved over time. MAIN LIMITATIONS: Perineural and intra-synovial analgesia were performed without contrast medium to assess the diffusion of mepivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that perineural analgesia is not reliable enough to differentiate pain originating from DIPJ and NB. Early evaluation of the DIPJ-A and NB-A can determine the origin of the pain. An improvement following NB-A was constant over time, but an improvement following DIPJ-A varied by up to 10 min.