Desplazamiento de los catéteres para bloqueo continuo del nervio supraescapular tras fisioterapia: estudio en cadáveres / Dislodgment of continuous suprascapular nerve block catheters after physiotherapy: A cadaver study

Antecedentes: Los bloqueos continuos de los nervios periféricos son de uso común para el manejo del dolor. Sin embargo, la incidencia de desplazamiento o migración del catéter es dudosa, pudiendo ser infraestimada y no denunciarse. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar el posicionamiento del extremo del catéter supraescapular antes y después de la manipulación rutinaria y simulada mediante fisioterapia de hombro en un modelo cadavérico anatómico.MétodoSe colocaron 8 catéteres para bloqueo continuo y ecoguiado del nervio supraescapular en cadáveres frescos criopreservados. La tomografía computarizada (TC) confirmó la localización de la punta del catéter tras la inyección de 1ml de medio de contraste. Realizamos una serie de movimientos estandarizados de hombro durante una sesión simulada de fisioterapia de hombro en cadáveres. Tras ello, administramos 1ml de azul de metileno a través de los catéteres, y seguidamente realizamos disecciones para identificar con precisión la localización de las puntas del catéter y compararlas con su localización previa a la «fisioterapia».ResultadosLa imagen de la TC confirmó la localización en todos los casos de los extremos del catéter en la muesca supraescapular. Sin embargo, tras la fisioterapia, se encontró que 2 catéteres (25%) habían migrado y, en especial, uno fue localizado en el músculo supraespinoso y el otro en el músculo trapecio.ConclusiónNuestros hallazgos sugieren que el desplazamiento del catéter puede producirse en cerca del 25% de los casos tras la manipulación mediante fisioterapia simulada. Sin embargo, es necesaria más investigación para determinar la incidencia real de los desplazamientos del catéter en la práctica clínica. (AU)

Background: Continuous peripheral nerve blocks are commonly used for pain management. However, the incidence of catheter dislodgement or migration is unclear, and may be underestimated and underreported. Our objective was to assess suprascapular catheter tip positioning before and after routine simulated shoulder physiotherapy manipulation in an anatomical cadaver model.MethodEight ultrasound-guided continuous suprascapular nerve block catheters were placed in cryopreserved fresh cadavers. Computed tomography (CT) confirmed the location of the catheter tip after injection of 1ml of contrast medium. We performed a series of standardized shoulder movements during a simulated shoulder physiotherapy session in cadavers. Following this, we administered 1ml of methylene blue through the catheters, and then performed anatomical dissections to accurately identify the location of the catheter tips and compare them to their placement prior to the ‘physiotherapy’ResultCT imaging confirmed the location of the catheter tips at the suprascapular notch in all cases. However, following physiotherapy, 2 catheters (25%) were found to have migrated - specifically, 1 was located in the supraspinatus muscle, and the other was located in the trapezius muscle.ConclusionOur findings suggest that catheter dislodgement may occur in approximately 25% of cases following simulated physiotherapy manipulation. However, further research is needed to determine the read incidence of catheter dislodgement in clinical practice. (AU)

Dislodgment of continuous suprascapular nerve block catheters after physiotherapy: A cadaver study.

BACKGROUND: Continuous peripheral nerve blocks are commonly used for pain management. However, the incidence of catheter dislodgement or migration is unclear, and may be underestimated and underreported. Our objective was to assess suprascapular catheter tip positioning before and after routine simulated shoulder physiotherapy manipulation in an anatomical cadaver model. METHOD: Eight ultrasound-guided continuous suprascapular nerve block catheters were placed in cryopreserved fresh cadavers. Computed tomography (CT) confirmed the location of the catheter tip after injection of 1 ml of contrast medium. We performed a series of standardized shoulder movements during a simulated shoulder physiotherapy session in cadavers. Following this, we administered 1 ml of methylene blue through the catheters, and then performed anatomical dissections to accurately identify the location of the catheter tips and compare them to their placement prior to the 'physiotherapy'. RESULT: CT imaging confirmed the location of the catheter tips at the suprascapular notch in all cases. However, following physiotherapy, 2 catheters (25%) were found to have migrated - specifically, 1 was located in the supraspinatus muscle, and the other was located in the trapezius muscle. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that catheter dislodgement may occur in approximately 25% of cases following simulated physiotherapy manipulation. However, further research is needed to determine the read incidence of catheter dislodgement in clinical practice.

Ultrasound-guided genicular nerves block vs. local infiltration analgesia for total knee arthroplasty: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Genicular nerves block is a promising technique to treat acute postoperative pain in total knee arthroplasty. Similar to surgeon-administered local infiltration analgesia, it targets sensory branches from the knee capsule, but through a selective ultrasound-guided injection that reduces local anaesthetic dose (150 ml ropivacaine 0.2% with local infiltration analgesia vs. 20 ml with genicular nerves block). This randomised non-inferiority trial compared the analgesic efficacy of genicular nerves block vs. local infiltration analgesia in the first 24 h following total knee arthroplasty. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to receive either ultrasound-guided block of five genicular nerves or local infiltration analgesia. The primary outcome was rest pain numeric rating scale (0-10) at 24 h. Secondary outcomes included pain numeric rating scale (rest and movement) and cumulative opioid consumption during the first 24 h. We analysed 29 patients in the genicular nerves block group and 30 in the local infiltration analgesia group. We found that the median difference (95%CI) in postoperative rest pain at 24 h (non-inferiority criteria, Δ = 1) was -1.0 (-2.0 to 1.0, p < 0.001). Median difference in cumulative opioid consumption was 0.0 mg (-3.0-5.0, p < 0.001) meeting the non-inferiority criteria, Δ = 23 mg. We conclude that genicular nerves block of five nerves provides non-inferior analgesia in the first 24 h following surgery compared with local infiltration analgesia, but with a considerable reduction in the local anaesthetic dose.

Papel de la medicina perioperatoria en la prevención de la prótesis de rodilla dolorosa / Role of perioperative medicine in the prevention of painful knee replacement

La artroplastia total de rodilla es una de las cirugías realizadas con más frecuencia en ortopedia. No obstante, hasta un 20% de los pacientes mostrarán persistencia del dolor después del procedimiento. El dolor posquirúrgico persistente puede ser una continuación del dolor agudo tras la cirugía o aparecer después de un período asintomático durante más de 3 meses.En la actualidad, se han caracterizado los factores de riesgo que se asocian a dolor posquirúrgico persistente tras la artroplastia total de rodilla. Forman parte del contexto perioperatorio del paciente (preoperatorio, intraoperatorio y postoperatorio) y se pueden agrupar en diferentes dimensiones: genéticas, demográficas, clínicas, quirúrgicas, analgésicas, inflamatorias y psicológicas.Su identificación y prevención, mediante un abordaje multimodal y biopsicosocial, es esencial en el contexto de la medicina perioperatoria y ha demostrado que puede prevenir o mejorar el dolor tras la cirugía.(AU)

Perioperative medicine role in painful knee prosthesis prevention.

Total knee arthroplasty is one of the most frequently performed orthopaedic surgeries. However, up to 20% of patients develop persistent postoperative pain. Persistent postoperative pain may be an extension of acute postoperative pain, but can also occur after more than 3 months without symptoms. Risk factors associated with persistent postoperative pain after arthroplasty have now been characterised within the patient's perioperative context (preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative), and can be grouped under genetic, demographic, clinical, surgical, analgesic, inflammatory and psychological factors. Identification and prevention of persistent postoperative pain through a multimodal and biopsychosocial approach is essential in the context of perioperative medicine, and has been shown to prevent or ameliorate postoperative pain.

Perioperative medicine role in painful knee prosthesis prevention. / Papel de la medicina perioperatoria en la prevención de la prótesis de rodilla dolorosa.

Total knee arthroplasty is one of the most frequently performed orthopaedic surgeries. However, up to 20% of patients develop persistent postoperative pain. Persistent postoperative pain may be an extension of acute postoperative pain, but can also occur after more than 3 months without symptoms. Risk factors associated with persistent postoperative pain after arthroplasty have now been characterised within the patient's perioperative context (preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative), and can be grouped under genetic, demographic, clinical, surgical, analgesic, inflammatory and psychological factors. Identification and prevention of persistent postoperative pain through a multimodal and biopsychosocial approach is essential in the context of perioperative medicine, and has been shown to prevent or ameliorate postoperative pain.

Implicación en Cataluña de los Servicios de Anestesiología y Reanimación en la pandemia por SARS-CoV-2. Una solución real coste-efectiva para una crisis sanitaria sin precedentes / Involvement in Catalonia of the Anaesthesiology and Resuscitation Services in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. A real, cost-effective solution to an unprecedented health crisis

No disponible

Bloqueo del plano del erector espinal en L4 en cirugía de artrodesis lumbar: serie de casos / L4 erector spinal plane block after lumbar spine arthrodesi: a case-series

INTRODUCCIÓN: El bloqueo en el plano del erector espinal (erector spinae plane [ESP]) a nivel torácico se ha desarrollado en los últimos años en multitud de procedimientos quirúrgicos, incluido los pacientes tratados mediante artrodesis lumbar. Nos propusimos evaluar el efecto analgésico del ESP realizado a nivel lumbar L4 en el postoperatorio inmediato en pacientes intervenidos por artrodesis lumbar. MÉTODOS Y CASOS CLÍNICOS: Descripción de una serie de 8 casos clínicos intervenidos por artrodesis lumbar a quienes se les realizó un bloqueo del ESP lumbar bilateral en L4 con 20 ml de ropivacaína al 0,2% por lado. Se describió la intensidad del dolor durante las primeras 48 h del postoperatorio mediante escala visual analógica y la analgesia de rescate empleada. El dolor postoperatorio en reposo fue controlado en todos los pacientes (entre 0 y 3), si bien el dolor en movimiento fue considerado entre leve y severo según los pacientes (entre 0 y 8). El consumo de rescate fue entre 1 y 22mg de morfina. CONCLUSIONES: El ESP lumbar parece contribuir al control del dolor postoperatorio inmediato durante las primeras 48 h en pacientes intervenidos por artrodesis lumbar

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic erector spinae plane block is now performed in many different surgical procedures, including lumbar spinal fusion. We evaluated the analgesic effect of lumbar ESP performed at L4 after lumbar spinal fusion surgery. METHODS AND CASE SERIES: Eight patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion were included in the case series. Erector spinae plane block was performed at L4 preoperatively, administering 20 ml of 0.2% ropivacaine on each side. We recorded patient-reported pain intensity during the first 48 postoperative hours using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and rescue analgesia requirements. Pain at rest was controlled in all patients (VAS 0 to 3), although pain on movement ranged from mild to severe (VAS 0 to 8). Rescue analgesia consumption ranged from 1 to 22mg morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar ESP appears to contribute to pain control during the first 48hours after lumbar spinal fusion

Bloqueo del nervio mediano en el antebrazo y arteria mediana persistente / Median nerve block in the forearm and persistent median artery

No disponible

Estudio anatómico de la distribución del volumen administrado tras bloqueo en el plano profundo del erector espinal a nivel lumbar / Anatomical description of anaesthetic spread after deep erector spinae block at L-4

Introducción: El bloqueo en el plano del erector espinal (erector spinae plane [ESP]) a nivel torácico se ha introducido cómo método analgésico postoperatorio. Sin embargo, a pesar de que su empleo a nivel lumbar ha sido publicada, su distribución y su mecanismo de acción no han sido esclarecidos. Nos propusimos describir la técnica de punción del bloqueo ESP a nivel lumbar y evaluar la distribución de 20ml administrados a nivel de la transversa de L4 en un modelo cadavérico. Métodos: Estudio observacional tras 12bloqueos del ESP lumbar en L4, sobre un modelo de cadáver fresco (6 bilaterales). Se valoró la distribución de 20ml de solución inyectada contrastada mediante tomografía computarizada en las 6 muestras. Fueron evaluados mediante estudio anatómico 4 de las muestras, 2mediante disección por planos y otros 2fueron congelados y seccionados con cortes axiales de 2-2,5cm de grosor. Resultados: La distribución de la solución inyectada se distribuyó en el interior de la musculatura erectora espinal cráneo-caudal desde L2 a L5, con límite medial en la articulares interapofisarias y lateral en la fascia toracolumbar. El paso anterior a la transversa no se observó en el 33% de los casos, fue mínimo y sin afectación de los nervios espinales correspondientes en el 51%, siendo extenso en 2 muestras (16%) y con afectación del nervio espinal correspondiente. Conclusiones: El ESP lumbar a nivel de L4 tiene una acción constante sobre los ramos posteriores de los nervios espinales, siendo infrecuente su paso al espacio paravertebral y bloquear el nervio espinal

Introduction: Thoracic erector spinae plane (ESP) block is now used for postoperative analgesia. However, although reports of lumbar ESP have been published, the anesthetic spread and mechanism of action of this technique remains unclear. We describe the lumbar ESP block technique and evaluate the spread of 20ml of solution administered at the level of the transverse process of L4 in a cadaver model. Methods: Observational study after 12 lumbar ESP blocks at L4 on a fresh cadaver model (6 bilaterally). The spread of 20ml of injected contrast solution was assessed by computed tomography in all 6 samples. Four of the samples were evaluated by anatomical study, 2 by plane dissection, and 2 others were frozen and cut into 2-2.5cm axial slices. Results: The injected solution spread from L2 to L5 in a cranio-caudal direction in the erector spinae muscle, reaching the facet joints medially and the thoracolumbar fascia laterally. In 33% of cases the solution did not spread anterior to the transverse process; in 51%, spread was minimal and did not affect the corresponding spinal nerves, and in 2 samples (16%), spread was extensive and reached the corresponding spinal nerves. Conclusions: Lumbar ESP at L4 always acts on the posterior branches of the spinal nerves, but seldom spreads to the paravertebral space to block the spinal nerve

Anatomical description of anaesthetic spread after deep erector spinae block at L-4. / Estudio anatómico de la distribución del volumen administrado tras bloqueo en el plano profundo del erector espinal a nivel lumbar.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic erector spinae plane (ESP) block is now used for postoperative analgesia. However, although reports of lumbar ESP have been published, the anesthetic spread and mechanism of action of this technique remains unclear. We describe the lumbar ESP block technique and evaluate the spread of 20ml of solution administered at the level of the transverse process of L4 in a cadaver model. METHODS: Observational study after 12 lumbar ESP blocks at L4 on a fresh cadaver model (6 bilaterally). The spread of 20ml of injected contrast solution was assessed by computed tomography in all 6 samples. Four of the samples were evaluated by anatomical study, 2 by plane dissection, and 2 others were frozen and cut into 2-2.5cm axial slices. RESULTS: The injected solution spread from L2 to L5 in a cranio-caudal direction in the erector spinae muscle, reaching the facet joints medially and the thoracolumbar fascia laterally. In 33% of cases the solution did not spread anterior to the transverse process; in 51%, spread was minimal and did not affect the corresponding spinal nerves, and in 2 samples (16%), spread was extensive and reached the corresponding spinal nerves. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar ESP at L4 always acts on the posterior branches of the spinal nerves, but seldom spreads to the paravertebral space to block the spinal nerve.

L4 erector spinal plane block after lumbar spine arthrodesi: A case-series. / Bloqueo del plano del erector espinal en L4 en cirugía de artrodesis lumbar: serie de casos.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic erector spinae plane block is now performed in many different surgical procedures, including lumbar spinal fusion. We evaluated the analgesic effect of lumbar ESP performed at L4 after lumbar spinal fusion surgery. METHODS AND CASE SERIES: Eight patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion were included in the case series. Erector spinae plane block was performed at L4 preoperatively, administering 20ml of 0.2% ropivacaine on each side. We recorded patient-reported pain intensity during the first 48 postoperative hours using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and rescue analgesia requirements. Pain at rest was controlled in all patients (VAS 0 to 3), although pain on movement ranged from mild to severe (VAS 0 to 8). Rescue analgesia consumption ranged from 1 to 22mg morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar ESP appears to contribute to pain control during the first 48hours after lumbar spinal fusion.

Evaluación del área de sección del nervio mediano tras la inyección intraneural o perineural / Cross-sectional area of the median nerve after intraneural vs perineural low volume administration

Introducción: Conocer la relación entre la aguja y el nervio durante el bloqueo de nervio periférico es de interés para evitar el daño neural; sin embargo, los signos de inyección intraneural no se hallan claramente establecidos. Nos propusimos determinar los cambios observados en el nervio periférico tras inyectar 1ml de solución en disposición intraneural o perineural de la aguja. Material y métodos: Se utilizaron 10 cadáveres frescos, a los cuales se les realizó bloqueo de nervio mediano ecoguiado en plano en 60 ocasiones (3 por brazo), realizando una punción intraneural (n=30) o perineural (n=30) según aleatorización previa. Tras el consenso de localización por 7 especialistas, se inyectó 1ml de solución y se evaluó el cambio en el área de sección del nervio y el desplazamiento a lo largo del mismo. Resultados: El área de sección del nervio mediano se aumentó en ambos grupos, sin embargo, el incremento fue significativamente mayor en el grupo intraneural (perineural 0,007+/-0,013 vs. intraneural 0,032+/-0,021cm2, p<0,0001). Un incremento superior al 27% del área de sección asegura una inyección intraneural en el nervio mediano según el análisis de la curva ROC. La difusión proximal y la distal se observó con mayor frecuencia en el grupo intraneural (proximal: 86 vs. 14%; p<0,0001. Distal: 43 vs. 4%; p<0,0001). Conclusiones: En base a nuestro estudio experimental concluimos que la inyección de un pequeño volumen (1ml) permite discriminar la disposición de la aguja intraneural vs. perineural en un porcentaje elevado de casos. Por ello, sugerimos que esta «dosis test» debe de considerarse en los algoritmos de seguridad si queremos reducir la incidencia de inyección intraneural

Introduction: To recognise the relationship between the needle tip and the median nerve during peripheral nerve block is of interest to avoid neural damage. However, signs of intraneural injection are not clearly established. The aim of this study was to define the changes observed in the peripheral nerve after the intraneural or perineural administration of 1ml of solution. Material and methods: Ultrasound guided median nerve blocks were performed in the forearm of 10 fresh cadavers on 60 occasions (3 per forearm). They were randomised into the intraneural (n=30) or perineural (n=30) location of the needle tip, after the consensus of location by 7 specialists. After 1ml of solution was injected an evaluation was made of the changes in the cross-sectional area of the nerve, as well as the displacement along the nerve. Results: The cross-sectional area of the median nerve was increased in both groups, however, the increase was significantly higher in the intraneural group (perineural 0.007+/-0.013cm2 vs. intraneural 0.032+/-0.021cm2, P<.0001). An increase of more than 27% of the area ensures an intraneural injection in the median nerve according to the ROC curve analysis. Both proximal and distal diffusion were observed more frequently in the intraneural group (proximal: 86% vs 14%, P<.0001, Distal: 43% vs 4%, P<.0001). Conclusions: Based on this experimental study, it is concluded that the injection of a small volume (1ml) allows to discriminate the disposition of the intraneural vs perineural needle in a high percentage of cases. Therefore, it is suggested that this "dose test" should be considered in the safety algorithms if it is required to reduce the incidence of intraneural injection

Eficacia analgésica del bloqueo pectoral modificado más bloqueo del plano del serrato en mamoplastia subpectoral: ensayo clínico, controlado, aleatorizado, triple ciego / Analgesic efficacy of modified pectoral block plus serratus plane block in breast augmentation surgery: A randomised, controlled, triple-blind clinical trial

Introducción: La cirugía protésica de mama es un procedimiento de cirugía plástica muy común, cuyo manejo analgésico postoperatorio es un reto para el equipo quirúrgico. El propósito del presente estudio fue validar la eficacia analgésica del bloqueo de los nervios pectorales y plano del serrato en mamoplastia de aumento retropectoral. Pacientes y métodos: Se diseñó un ensayo clínico, controlado, aleatorizado, triple ciego, que incluyó a 30 pacientes intervenidas mediante mamoplastia de aumento retropectoral. En ambos grupos se realizaron bloqueo pectoral modificado y bloqueo del plano serrato con un volumen total de 40ml por mama. En 15 de ellas se inyectó bupivacaína 0,25% con epinefrina (GPEC), y en las otras 15 se administró suero fisiológico (GC). Se hizo manejo estandarizado de la anestesia y la analgesia postoperatoria. Se midieron parámetros hemodinámicos intraoperatorios, necesidad de analgesia postoperatoria y la escala numérica verbal a su llegada a reanimación, a las 3, 6 y 24h, así como la calidad percibida por los pacientes y cirujanos. Resultados: En el postoperatorio inmediato, se pudo percibir una disminución del dolor en las pacientes del GPEC (5,3±2,3 vs. 2,9±2,7; p=0,018). No se observaron diferencias significativas a las 3, 6 y 24h. Los cirujanos valoraron la calidad anestésico-analgésica como muy buena en el 80% de los casos en el GPEC frente al 33% en el GC (p=0,01). Conclusiones: El uso de estos bloqueos es una buena estrategia analgésica perioperatoria en el manejo multimodal en la mamoplastia de aumento retropectoral

Introduction: Prosthetic breast surgery is a very common plastic surgery procedure, but its postoperative analgesic management is a challenge for the surgical team. The purpose of the present study is to validate the analgesic efficacy of pectoral block and serratus plane block in retropectoral mammoplasty. Patients and methods: A randomised, controlled, triple-blind, clinical trial was designed, and included 30 patients undergoing retropectoral augmentation mammoplasty. All of them had a modified PECII block and a serratus plane block with a total volume of 40ml per breast. In 15 of them bupivacaine 0.25% (GPEC) was injected and in the other 15 patients saline was used (GC). Standardised management of anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia was performed. Intra-operative haemodynamic parameters required for postoperative analgesia, and a numeric verbal scale on arrival in the recovery unit were measured and at 3, 6, and 24h. The quality perceived by patients and surgeons was also measured. Results: Post-operative pain was significantly better in GPEC (5.3±2.3 vs. 2.9±2.7; P=.018). No significant differences were observed at 3, 6, and 24h. The surgeons rated the anaesthetic-analgesic quality as very good in 80% of the cases in GPEC versus 33% in CG (P=.01). Conclusions: The use of these blocks is a good perioperative analgesic strategy in the multimodal management of retropectoral augmentation mammoplasty

Analgesic efficacy of modified pectoral block plus serratus plane block in breast augmentation surgery: A randomised, controlled, triple-blind clinical trial. / Eficacia analgésica del bloqueo pectoral modificado más bloqueo del plano del serrato en mamoplastia subpectoral: ensayo clínico, controlado, aleatorizado, triple ciego.

INTRODUCTION: Prosthetic breast surgery is a very common plastic surgery procedure, but its postoperative analgesic management is a challenge for the surgical team. The purpose of the present study is to validate the analgesic efficacy of pectoral block and serratus plane block in retropectoral mammoplasty. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomised, controlled, triple-blind, clinical trial was designed, and included 30 patients undergoing retropectoral augmentation mammoplasty. All of them had a modified PECII block and a serratus plane block with a total volume of 40ml per breast. In 15 of them bupivacaine 0.25% (GPEC) was injected and in the other 15 patients saline was used (GC). Standardised management of anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia was performed. Intra-operative haemodynamic parameters required for postoperative analgesia, and a numeric verbal scale on arrival in the recovery unit were measured and at 3, 6, and 24h. The quality perceived by patients and surgeons was also measured. RESULTS: Post-operative pain was significantly better in GPEC (5.3±2.3 vs. 2.9±2.7; P=.018). No significant differences were observed at 3, 6, and 24h. The surgeons rated the anaesthetic-analgesic quality as very good in 80% of the cases in GPEC versus 33% in CG (P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: The use of these blocks is a good perioperative analgesic strategy in the multimodal management of retropectoral augmentation mammoplasty.