Ultrasound-Guided Proximal and Distal Suprascapular Nerve Blocks: A Comparative Cadaveric Study.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of our study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy of ultrasound (US)-guided distal suprascapular nerve (dSSN) and proximal SSN (pSSN) blocks. Secondary aims were to compare the phrenic nerve involvement between groups and to describe the anatomical features of the sensory branches of the dSSN. METHODS: pSSN and dSSN blocks were performed in 14 cadavers (28 shoulders). Ten mL of 0.2% ropivacaine colored with methylene blue was injected under US guidance. Accuracy was determined using SSN staining and the distance between predefined anatomical landmarks and the targeted SSN. The phrenic nerve (PN) was judged to be colored or not. The distribution of the sensory branches that originate from the 14 dSSNs is described. Quantitative data are expressed as median (range). RESULTS: The pSSN was dyed more frequently than the dSSN (13 vs 11, P = 0.59). The targeted SSN was close to the suprascapular notch (1.3 [0-5.2] cm) and the origin of the SSN (1.4 [0.2-4.5] cm) for dSSN and pSSN blocks, respectively (P = 0.62). For dSSN blocks, the most frequent injection site was the supraspinous fossa. Three PNs were marked in pSSN blocks, compared with none in dSSN blocks (P = 0.22). Three sensory branches were identified for all 14 dSSNs: the medial subacromial branch, the lateral subacromial branch, and the posterior glenohumeral branch. CONCLUSIONS: US-guided pSSN and dSSN blocks can be realized with accuracy. A distal approach to the SSN could be an alternative to interscalene brachial plexus block for the management of postoperative pain after shoulder surgery in high-respiratory risk patients.

Ultrasound-Guided Versus Landmark-Based Approach to the Distal Suprascapular Nerve Block: A Comparative Cadaveric Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of distal suprascapular nerve (dSSN) blockade performed with the use of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia (USRA) versus with a landmark-based approach (LBA). A secondary aim was to describe the anatomic features of the sensory branches of the dSSN. METHODS: USRA and LBA were performed in 15 shoulders each from 15 cadavers (total of 30 shoulders). Then, 10 mL of methylene blue‒infused ropivacaine 0.75% was injected into the dSSN. Simultaneously, 2.5 mL of red latex solution was injected to identify the position of the needle tip. The division and distribution of the sensory branches originating from the SSN were described. RESULTS: The tip of the needle was identified at 1.3 cm (range, 0-5.2 cm) and 1.5 cm (range, 0-4.5 cm) with USRA and the LBA, respectively (P = .90). Staining diffused past the origin of the most proximal sensory branch in 27 cases. The most proximal sensory branch arose 2.5 cm from the suprascapular notch. Among the 3 failures that occurred in the USRA group, the sensory branches also failed to be marked. All 30 dSSNs gave off 3 sensory branches, which innervated the posterior glenohumeral capsule, the subacromial bursa, and the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments. CONCLUSIONS: An LBA is as reliable and accurate as US guidance for anesthetic blockade of the dSSN. Marking of the suprascapular nerve must be proximal to the suprascapular notch to involve the 3 sensory branches in the anesthetic blockade. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The present study demonstrates that a landmark-based approach to anesthetic blockade of the distal suprascapular nerve is accurate and can be performed by orthopaedic surgeons lacking experience in ultrasound-guided anesthetic techniques.

Population Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Ropivacaine in Spinal Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is frequently used in spinal anesthesia but the relationship between plasma concentrations and sensory block level remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between plasma ropivacaine concentrations and effects during spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Sixty patients aged between 18 and 82 years were included in this study after providing written informed consent. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intrathecal administration of ropivacaine 15, 20 or 25 mg. Blood samples were drawn to determine ropivacaine concentrations, and sensory blockade was assessed using pinprick testing. Ropivacaine plasma concentrations and sensory block level were analyzed using a nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach with Monolix 4.2.2. Uncertainty of parameters was estimated by bootstrapping. RESULTS: Overall, 216 plasma ropivacaine values and 407 sensory block-related data were available for pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model evaluation. A two-compartment open model connected to a spinal compartment was selected to describe the PKs of ropivacaine. Sensory block modeling was performed using a sigmoid E max model assuming an equilibration delay between the amount in the depot or spinal compartment and at the effect site. Using multiple linear regression analysis, we were able to demonstrate the importance of dose, age and weight as major predictors of sensory block-level kinetics. CONCLUSIONS: This first population PK-PD model for ropivacaine in spinal anesthesia confirms the relationship between plasma ropivacaine concentrations and effect. We also clarify the relationship between the spread of sensory block level and dose, age and, for the first time, weight. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the Reims University Hospital Ethics Committee (protocol: PHRC-2005; registered at Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé ANSM: D60890). This was an open, prospective, monocentric study conducted in the University Hospital of Reims (France).