BackgroundInterscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) provides excellent analgesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgeries but is associated with adverse effects including hemidiaphragmatic paresis. We aimed to compare the respiratory effects, forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) between suprascapular nerve block (SSB) and ISB.MethodsSixty patients were recruited and randomized into ISB, anterior SSB, and posterior SSB groups. FVC, FEV1, and diaphragmatic excursion were evaluated at baseline and 30 minutes after intervention. Blocks were performed under ultrasound guidance with 15 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine. Pain scores were assessed at 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively.ResultsThe ISB group showed a reduced FVC of 31.2% ± 17.5% (mean ± SD), while the anterior and posterior SSB groups had less reduction of 3.6% ± 18.6% and 6.8% ± 6.5%, respectively (P < 0.001). The ISB group showed more reduction in diaphragmatic excursion than the anterior and posterior SSB groups (median [IQR]): −85.7% (−95.3% to −63.3%) vs. −1.8% (−13.1% to 2.3%) and −1.2% (−8.8% to 16.8%), respectively (P < 0.001). The median pain scores (IQR) in the ISB and anterior SSB groups were lower than those in the posterior SSB group at 6 hours on movement: 0 (0–2), 1.8 (0–4.5) vs. 5 (2.5–8), respectively (P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in oxycodone consumption postoperatively.ConclusionsAnterior SSB preserves lung function and has a comparable analgesic effect as ISB. Thus, it is recommended for arthroscopic shoulder surgeries, especially in patients who have reduced lung function.
BackgroundThe ideal emergency cricothyroidotomy technique remains a topic of ongoing debate. This study aimed to compare the cannula-to-Melker technique with the scalpel-bougie technique and determine whether yearly training in cricothyroidotomy techniques is sufficient for skill retention.MethodsWe conducted an observational crossover bench study to compare the cannula-to-Melker with the scalpel-bougie technique in a porcine tracheal model. Twenty-eight anesthetists participated. The primary outcome was time taken for device insertion. Secondary outcomes were first-pass success rate, incidence of tracheal trauma, and technique preference. We also compared the data on outcome measures with the data obtained in a similar workshop a year ago.ResultsThe scalpel-bougie technique was significantly faster than the cannula-to-Melker technique for cricothyroidotomy (median time of 45.2 s vs. 101.3 s; P = 0.001). Both techniques had 100% success rate within two attempts; there were no significant differences in the first-pass success rates and incidence of tracheal wall trauma (P > 0.999 and P = 0.727, respectively) between them. The relative risks of inflicting tracheal wall trauma after a failed cricothyroidotomy attempt were 6.9 (95% CI 1.5–31.1), 2.3 (95% CI 0.3–20.7) and 3.0 (95% CI 0.3–25.9) for the scalpel-bougie, cannula-cricothyroidotomy, and Melker-Seldinger airway, respectively. The insertion time and incidence of tracheal wall trauma were lower when the present data were compared with data from a similar workshop conducted the previous year.ConclusionsThis study supports the use of a scalpel-bougie technique for cricothyroidotomy by anesthetists and advocates a yearly training program for skill retention.
Background Implantation of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) are generally carried out with local anaesthesia (LA) and sedation. However, peri-procedural hypoxaemia and hypotension are well recognised complications of this technique primarily due to sedation effect. The pectoral nerves block (PECs) targets the lateral and median pectoral nerves at interfascial plane between pectoralis major and minor muscles. This technique potentially lower sedation usage and therefore lower sedation-related complications. There is, however, no randomised study to date comparing CIED procedure with and without PECs block. Methods We randomly assigned 64 patients undergoing CIED implantation procedure with LA (subcutaneous lignocaine 1%) and sedation (intermittent bolus of intravenous midazolam and fentanyl according to pain score) with (32 patients) and without (32 patients) PECs. Those received PECs with be given 10 mls of 0.25% ropivacaine. Primary endpoint was total dose of sedation used. Secondary endpoints were perioperative incidence of hypoxia, hypotension and hypopnea, perioperative pain scores, proceduralists' and patients' satisfaction scores. Results Overall, majority were male (64.1%), mean age of 67.9±10.7 years, mean BMI of 25.7±5.5 kg/m2 and mean lignocaine 1% dosage was 15.3±3.1mL. Compare to those with and without PECs, there was no significant difference in baseline characteristics. The mean fentanyl [25.3±25.0 mcg (95% CI: 16.3–34.3) vs 32.2±26.7 mcg (95% CI: 22.6–41.8), p=0.29] and midazolam dosage [0.7±0.7mg (95% CI: 0.4–0.9) vs 0.8±0.8 (95% CI: 0.6±1.1), p=0.36] were trended lower in PECs compared to without PECs. PECs group had lower pain score at recovery (OR: 1.7, 95% CI: 0.38–7.93, p=0.48). Proceduralists' and patients' satisfaction score were trended higher in PECs compare to non-PECs group. There was no hypoxia, hypotension or hypopnea in both groups. Conclusion Patients underwent CIEDs implantation procedure with PECs received lower sedation dosage and lower periprocedure pain score as compare to non-PECs group. Satisfaction score for both proceduralists and patients were trended higher in PECs group compare to non-PECs group. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Public hospital(s). Main funding source(s): Changi General Hospital Research Grant
Background: Intraoperative hypothermia is detrimental to the patient. This, however, can be minimized with infusion of warmed fluids. Objectives: We investigated the warming capabilities of the Ranger © 24500 (Ranger) and ANIMEC AM-2S (ANIMEC) at various low infusion rates. We also examined the use of two ANIMEC warmers placed in series along the intravenous tubing. Methods: We had three comparative trial groups for our experiment. Trial group 1 involved the use of an ANIMEC fluid warmer. Trial group 2 involved the use of two ANIMEC fluid warmers placed in series. Trial group 3 involved the use of the Ranger. Three different infusion rates (1 ml/min, 5 ml/min and 10 ml/min) were examined. Results: The use of two ANIMEC fluid warmers delivered the warmest fluid in all three study infusion rates. The mean (SD) delivered temperature was 24.11 (0.62)°C at 1 ml/min, 29.59 (0.10)°C at 5 ml/min and 29.27 (0.10)°C at 10 ml/min. The Ranger delivered the lowest temperatures at infusion rates of 1 ml/min and 5 ml/min. The mean temperatures were 21.01 (0.38)°C and 23.87 (0.34)°C respectively. The mean temperatures of utilizing one ANIMEC fluid warmer were 21.49 (0.35)°C, 25.47 (0.08)°C and 24.78 (0.12)°C at infusion rates of 1 ml/min, 5 ml/min and 10 ml/min respectively. Conclusion: The ANIMEC performs better than the Ranger at low flow rates of up to 5 ml/min. A novel method of placing the two ANIMEC warming devices in series can further improve its warming capabilities.
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.