This prospective, randomized, double-blind study compared two techniques of axillary brachial plexus block using a peripheral nerve stimulator. Both groups received initial musculocutaneous nerve block followed by either a single injection on median nerve stimulation (group 1) or a double injection divided between median and radial nerves (group 2). All 60 patients received a total of 30 ml of lidocaine 15 mg/ml with epinephrine 5 microg/ml. Complete sensory blockade of all six peripheral nerves occurred in 53% and 97% of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P<0.001), with a more rapid onset of blockade occurring in group 2 patients (P<0.001). Complete motor blockade was evident in 30% and 83% of patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P<0.001).

The axillary approach to brachial plexus blockade provides satisfactory anaesthesia for elbow, forearm, and hand surgery and also provides reliable cutaneous anaesthesia of the inner upper arm including the medial cutaneous nerve of arm and intercostobrachial nerve, areas often missed with other approaches. In addition, the axillary approach remains the safest of the four main options, as it does not risk blockade of the phrenic nerve, nor does it have the potential to cause pneumothorax, making it an ideal option for day case surgery. Historically, single-injection techniques have not provided reliable blockade in the musculocutaneous and radial nerve territories, but success rates have greatly improved with multiple-injection techniques whether using nerve stimulation or ultrasound guidance. Complete, reliable, rapid, and safe blockade of the arm is now achievable, and the paper summarizes the current position with particular reference to ultrasound guidance.

There is a wide variety of patients who present for shoulder surgery, ranging from the fit, robust patient with a sports injury requiring a stabilization procedure, to the frail, elderly rheumatoid patient requiring joint decompression or arthroplasty. Recent surgical advances have resulted in the development of minimal access arthroscopic procedures with resulting improvements in speed of convalescence. However, the management of severe postoperative pain remains a major challenge for many anaesthetists. Regional anaesthetic techniques have the ability to control pain effectively both at rest and on movement, reduce muscle spasm, and allow earlier mobilization and cooperation with physiotherapy. Therefore, these techniques have the potential to improve both patient recovery and outcome after both open and arthroscopic surgeries. Management of these patients requires thorough preoperative assessment, careful intraoperative management, and appropriate use of regional anaesthetic techniques to provide adequate dynamic pain relief in the initial postoperative period.

Summary This study compared the posterior and popliteal fossa approaches for sciatic nerve block. Patients scheduled to undergo foot surgery were allocated randomly into one of two groups: group A (n = 20) received sciatic nerve block via the posterior approach and group B (n = 20) received a block using the popliteal fossa approach. All blocks were performed with the aid of a peripheral nerve stimulator and alkalinised 0.5% bupivacaine with 1 in 200 000 adrenaline was injected in a dose of 2 mg.kg Nineteen of 20 blocks in group A were successful compared with nine of 20 in group B (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the groups in respect of time to onset or duration of block. Patients in group B reported less discomfort during performance of the sciatic nerve block but required supplementary nerve blocks more frequently. We recommend the use of the posterior approach for sciatic nerve block.

We performed a double-blind, randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a continuous-infusion brachial plexus block with levobupivacaine compared with that of a standard single injection for the management of post-operative pain after surgery on the shoulder. Eight patients were randomised to receive a pre-operative brachial plexus block using 30 ml of levobupivacaine 0.5% with adrenaline 1:200 000 followed by insertion of a 20-gauge polyamide catheter. This was connected to a disposable elastometric pump, set immediately after surgery to administer a continuous flow of levobupivacaine 0.25% at a rate of 5 ml per hour. The other eight patients were randomised to receive only the initial injection of 30 ml. The study was double-blinded with the aid of sham catheters and clamped pumps. All patients were given regular paracetamol and were prescribed morphine through a patient-controlled analgesia pump. Motor and sensory block assessments, visual analogue scale pain scores and consumption of morphine were recorded after the operation and then at 6, 12 and 24 hours after administration of the block. Satisfactory motor and sensory block was achieved in all patients. The mean visual analogue scale pain score at 12 hours and consumption of morphine at 24 hours after injection were significantly lower (p < 0.05) in the continuous-infusion group. This group also took longer to request their first additional analgesia and reported a significantly higher overall level of satisfaction. Our study has shown that continuous interscalene infusion of levobupivacaine is an effective method of post-operative analgesia after major surgery of the shoulder.

No abstract

Two groups of 12 patients had a sciatic nerve block performed with 20 ml of either ropivacaine 7.5 mg ml(-1) or bupivacaine 5 mg ml(-1). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean time to onset of complete anaesthesia of the foot or to first request for post-operative analgesia. The quality of the block was the same in each group. Although there was no statistically significant difference in the mean time to peak plasma concentrations the mean peak concentration of ropivacaine was significantly higher than that of bupivacaine. There were no signs of systemic local anaesthetic toxicity in any patient in either group.

The aim of the present study was to examine, in a double-blind, randomised manner, the effects of glycopyrronium 0.005 mglkg, atropine 0.01 mgikg or a placebo (normal saIine) on the frequency of bradycardia in 92 patients scheduled for major abdominal or gynaecological surgery. All patients received fentanyl. halothane and vecuronium. The frequency of bradycardia in the group that received saline was 18%. No cases occurred in either anticholinergic group. Mean heart rates intra-operativeIy were not signiJicantly different between the atropine and glycopyrronium groups. It is suggested that the routine use of pre-operative anticholinergic agents should be considered when a similar anaesthetic technique is employed.