ObjectiveWe hypothesized that ultrasound (US)-guided technique of the supra- and infraclavicular and axillary approaches of brachial plexus block (BPB) will produce a high quality of surgical anesthesia for operations below the shoulder independently of the approach and body mass index (BMI). Intercostobrachial and medial brachial cutaneous nerves will be blocked separately because they are not a part of the brachial plexus.MethodsThis is a prospective randomized observer-blinded study. The three approaches of the US-guided BPB without neurostimulation were compared for quality, performance time, and correlation between performance time and BMI. Intercostobrachial and medial brachial cutaneous nerve blocks were used in all patients.ResultsA total of 101 patients were randomized into three groups: SCL (supraclavicular), ICL (infraclavicular), and AX (axillary). Seven patients were excluded due to various factors. All three groups were similar in demographic data, M:F proportion, preoperative diagnosis and type of surgery, anesthesiologists who performed the block, and surgical staff that performed the surgical intervention. The time between the end of the block performance and the start of the operation was also similar. The quality of the surgical anesthesia and discomfort during the operation were identical following comparison between groups. No direct positive correlation was observed between BMI and the block performance time. The time for the axillary block was slightly longer than the time for the supra- and infraclavicular approaches, but it had no practical clinical significance. Transient Horner syndrome was observed in three patients in the SCL group. No other adverse effects or complications were observed.ConclusionsAll three approaches can be used for US-guided BPB with similar quality of surgical anesthesia for operations of below the shoulder. A block of the intercostobrachial and medial brachial cutaneous nerves is recommended. Obesity is not a significant factor in relation to the time of US-guided BPB performance, or the quality of surgical anesthesia. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01442558.)
ObjectivesWe hypothesized that preoperative (pre-op) ultrasound (US)-guided posterior transversus abdominis plane block (TAP) and US-guided ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric nerve block (ILI+IHG) will produce a comparable analgesia after Lichtenstein patch tension-free method of open inguinal hernia repair in adult men. The genital branch of the genitofemoral nerve will be blocked separately.MethodsThis is a prospective, randomized, controlled, and observer-blinded clinical study. A total of 166 adult men were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a pre-op TAP group, a pre-op ILI+IHG group, and a control group. An intraoperative block of the genital branch of the genitofemoral nerve was performed in all patients in all three groups, followed by postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine. The pain intensity and morphine consumption immediately after surgery and during the 24 hours after surgery were compared between the groups.ResultsA total of 149 patients completed the study protocol. The intensity of pain immediately after surgery and morphine consumption were similar in the two “block” groups; however, they were significantly decreased compared with the control group. During the 24 hours after surgery, morphine consumption in the ILI+IHG group decreased compared with the TAP group, as well as in each “block” group versus the control group. Twenty-four hours after surgery, all evaluated parameters were similar.ConclusionUltrasound-guided ILI+IHG provided better pain control than US-guided posterior TAP following the Lichtenstein patch tension-free method of open inguinal hernia repair in men during 24 hours after surgery. (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01429480.)
BackgroundThe PROSPECT (Procedure-Specific Postoperative Pain Management) Group recommended a single injection femoral nerve block in 2008 as a guideline for analgesia after total knee arthroplasty. Other authors have recommended the addition of sciatic and obturator nerve blocks. The lateral femoral cutaneous nerve is also involved in pain syndrome following total knee arthroplasty. We hypothesized that preoperative blocking of all four nerves would offer superior analgesia to femoral nerve block alone.MethodsThis is a prospective, randomized, controlled, and observer-blinded clinical study. A total of 107 patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a femoral nerve block group, a multiple nerve block group, and a control group. All patients were treated postoperatively using patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine. Pain intensity at rest, during flexion and extension, and morphine consumption were compared between groups over three days.ResultsA total of 90 patients completed the study protocol. Patients who received multiple nerve blocks experienced superior analgesia and had reduced morphine consumption during the postoperative period compared to the other two groups. Pain intensity during flexion was significantly lower in the “blocks” groups versus the control group. Morphine consumption was significantly higher in the control group.ConclusionsPain relief after total knee arthroplasty immediately after surgery and on the first postoperative day was significantly superior in patients who received multiple blocks preoperatively, with morphine consumption significantly lower during this period. A preoperative femoral nerve block alone produced partial and insufficient analgesia immediately after surgery and on the first postoperative day. (Clinical trial registration number (NIH): NCT01303120)
Background: Multiple nerve blocks (MNB) provide excellent time-limited perioperative analgesia following total knee arthroplasty. Both perineural and systemic use of dexamethasone (DXM) as an adjuvant to local anesthetic prolong the duration of single-shot MNB. We hypothesized that preoperative perineural injection of DXM prolongs analgesia after MNB more than the same dose of intravenous (IV) DXM injection due to direct action on the nerves and not only by a systemic action mechanism.
Background: Blunt traumatic brain injury (bTBI) and uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock (UCHS) are common causes of mortality in polytrauma. We studied the influence of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) resuscitation in a rat model with both bTBI and UCHS before achieving hemorrhage control. Methods: The bTBI was induced by an external weight drop (200 g) onto the bare skull of anesthetized male Lewis (Lew/SdNHsd) rats; UCHS was induced by resection of two-thirds of the rats’ tails. Fifteen minutes following trauma, bTBI+UCHS rats underwent resuscitation with FFP or lactated Ringer’s solution (LR). Eight groups were evaluated: (1) Sham; (2) bTBI; (3) UCHS; (4) UCHS+FFP; (5) UCHS+LR; (6) bTBI+UCHS; (7) bTBI+UCHS+FFP; and (8) bTBI+UCHS+LR. Bleeding volume, hematocrit, lactate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, and mortality were measured. Results: The study included 97 rats that survived the immediate trauma. Mean blood loss up to the start of resuscitation was similar among UCHS only and bTBI+UCHS rats (P=0.361). Following resuscitation, bleeding was more extensive in bTBI+UCHS+FFP rats (5.2 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.7, 6.6) than in bTBI+UCHS+LR rats (2.5 mL, 95% CI 1.2, 3.8) and bTBI+UCHS rats (1.9 mL, 95% CI -0.2, 3.9) (P=0.005). Similarly, non-significant increases in blood loss were observed in UCHS+FFP rats (P=0.254). Overall mortality increased if bleeding was above 4.5 mL (92.3% versus 8%; P<0.001). Mortality was 83.3% (10/12) in bTBI+UCHS+FFP rats, 41.7% (5/12) in bTBI+UCHS+LR rats, and 64.3% (9/14) in bTBI+UCHS rats. Conclusion: The bTBI did not exacerbate bleeding in rats undergoing UCHS. Compared to LR, FFP resuscitation was associated with a significantly increased blood loss in bTBI+UCHS rats.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.