Real-Time Injection Pressure Sensing and Minimal Intensity Stimulation Combination During Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Nerve Blocks: An Exploratory Observational Trial.

BACKGROUND: Nerve damage can occur after peripheral nerve block (PNB). Ultrasound guidance does not eliminate the risk of intraneural injection or nerve injury. Combining nerve stimulation and injection pressure (IP) monitoring with ultrasound guidance has been suggested to optimize needle tip location in PNB. In this prospective observational study, we hypothesized that measured pairs of IP and minimum intensity of stimulation (MIS) might differentiate successive needle tip locations established by high-resolution ultrasound during PNB. METHODS: For this exploratory study, 240 observations for 40 ultrasound-guided PNBs were studied in 28 patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery. During the progression of the needle to the nerve observed by ultrasonography, the IP was measured continuously using a computerized pressure-sensing device with a low flow rate of solution. Stimulation thresholds and electrical impedance were obtained by an impedance analyzer coupled to the nerve stimulator at 6 successive needle positions. The median (quartile) or mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) was reported. A mixed model analysis was used, and the sample was also explored using a classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm. RESULTS: Specific combinations of IP and MIS were measured for subcutaneous, epimysium contact, intramuscular, nerve contact (231 mm Hg [203-259 mm Hg] and 1.70 mA [1.38-2.02 mA]), intraneural location (188 mm Hg [152-224 mm Hg] and 0.58 mA [0.46-0.70 mA]), and subparaneural location (47 mm Hg [41-53 mm Hg] and 1.35 mA [1.09-1.61 mA]). The CART algorithm shows that the optimal subparaneural needle tip position might be defined by the lowest pressure (<81.3 mm Hg) and MIS (<1.5 mA) cutoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory study evaluated concepts to generate hypotheses. The combinations of IP and MIS might help the physician during a PNB procedure. A low IP and low MIS might confirm a subparaneural location, and a high IP and a low MIS might be an alert for the intraneural location of the needle tip.

Combination of real-time needle-tip pressure sensing and minimal intensity stimulation limits unintentional intraneural injection during an ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block procedure: A randomized, parallel group, controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Ultrasound guidance does not eliminate the risk of intraneural injection, which must be avoided during PNB. Combining ultrasound guidance (USG), nerve stimulation (NS), and injection pressure monitoring is advocated to prevent nerve injury during PNB. We hypothesized that combining patient-tailored dynamic NS and real-time pressure sensing (RTPS) could reduce the incidence of intraneural injection and nerve puncture during USG PNB compared with a traditional fixed thresholds (Control) procedure. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective study. SETTING: Operating room. PATIENTS: One hundred ASA physical status I to III patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patient anesthetized using axillary, sciatic or femoral USG PNB were randomized to the PresStim group (Dynamic RTPS and NS set at 1.5 mA then decreased; n = 50) or Control group (fixed thresholds for in-line pressure mechanical manometer and NS at 0.2 mA; n = 50). MEASUREMENTS: Procedural ultrasound images and videos were recorded, stored and reviewed in random order by two experts in ultrasound-guided PNB blinded to the group. They noted the needle-to-nerve relationship and intraneural injection for all blocked nerves. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-three USG PNBs were performed (56 axillary brachial plexus blocks, 40 femoral nerve blocks and 27 sciatic popliteal nerve blocks); 235 blocked nerves and videos were recorded and analyzed (PresStim, 118; Control, 117). Less paresthesia was noted in the PresStim group (12.7%) compared with the Control group (18.8%). The risk of intraneural injection was significantly higher in the Control group (odds ratio [OR], 17.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-135, P = 0.007). The risk of nerve puncture (OR, 22.7; 95% CI, 2.9-175, p = 0.003) and needle-nerve contact (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 2.4-9.5, p < 0.001) was significantly higher in the Control group than the PresStim group. CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions of the study, dynamic triple monitoring combining RTPS, NS and USG decreases intraneural injection and unintentional needle-nerve contact and puncture during a PNB procedure.