Ultrasound and nerve stimulator guided continuous femoral nerve block analgesia after total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter randomized controlled study

Wang, Fen; Liu, Liwei; Hu, Ziqi; Peng, Yongbo; Zhang, Xiaoqing; Li, Quan

doi:10.1016/j.bjane.2013.07.007

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The needle was made air-free with the given drug, and under all aseptic conditions, the femoral artery was palpated on the operated limb just below the midpoint of the inguinal crease, and about 1.5-2 cm lateral to it, the point of insertion was marked. Using a 22-gauge insulated Stimuplex needle (B. Braun, Germany), the skin was punctured and the needle was manipulated and repositioned to elicit contraction of the quadriceps femoris muscle [ 7 , 8 ]. The current was then decreased slowly and the position of the needle was adjusted finely to get a negative stimulation at <0.3 mA.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peripheral Nerve Stimulator Versus Ultrasound-Guided Femoral Nerve Block for Knee Arthroscopy Procedures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Behera¹,

Gunupuru²,

Sahu³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Femoral nerve block (FNB) provides effective analgesia and is a widely used technique for postoperative pain relief for orthopedic procedures on lower limbs. This study aims to compare the efficacy of ultrasonography (USG) versus peripheral nerve stimulator (PNS)-guided FNB in knee arthroscopic procedures. Methodology This randomized comparative study included two study groups with 30 participants in each group who were given FNB with either PNS or USG for knee arthroscopic procedures following spinal anesthesia. The study evaluated the number of needle repositioning, the time taken for performing the block, the efficacy of postoperative analgesia based on the duration of the block, and patient satisfaction. Results The number of needle repositioning and time taken to finish the procedure using USG was lower compared to the group using PNS (p < 0.001). The duration of the block was comparable in both groups (p = 0.584). Patients were satisfied with both techniques and responded as either very good or outstanding and chose neither as inferior (p = 0.310). Conclusions Both techniques have equal efficacy concerning the duration of the effect of the block and patient satisfaction. However, the procedural time and number of needle repositioning were significantly less in the group where USG was used for the block.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%