Prospective comparison of continuous femoral nerve block with nonstimulating catheter placement versus stimulating catheter-guided perineural placement in volunteers ,

Salinas, Francis V.; Neal, Joseph M.; Sueda, Lila A; Kopacz, Dan J.; Liu, Spencer S.

doi:10.1016/j.rapm.2004.02.009

Cited by 49 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Salinas et Al. in 2004(Salinas et al, 2004) published a prospective comparison of continuous femoral nerve block with nonstimulating catheter placement versus stimulating catheterguided perineural placement, randomizing twenty volunteers; a stimulating catheter was placed on one side and an identical non-stimulating catheter on the contralateral side. Success of femoral block was defined as loss of sensation to cold and pinprick stimuli.…”

Section: Study Description and Results (Table 2 )mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They concluded that blind catheter advancement was as reliable as a stimulating catheter technique for establishing and maintaining continuous femoral nerve block for postoperative analgesia as a part of multimodal analgesia technique after total knee arthroplasty. In summary, although advantageous from a theoretical standpoint and in experimental designs (Salinas et al, 2004), randomized controlled trials in the clinical environment have yielded limited evidence to justify use of stimulating catheters for continuous femoral nerve block after knee surgery. The increased cost and need for additional catheter adjustments compared with nonstimulating catheter also make it hard to justify their use in this clinical setting.…”

Section: Salinas Et Al 2004mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy of Continuous Femoral Nerve Block with Stimulating Catheters Versus Nonstimulating Catheters - A Systematic-Narrative Review

Dauri¹,

Celidonio²,

Nahmias³

et al. 2012

Pain Management - Current Issues and Opinions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionA femoral nerve block is simple to perform, has a high rate success, carries a low risk of complications, and it is widely used technique for surgical anesthesia and post-operative pain management of the lower extremity. It provides analgesia to the anterior thigh, including the flexor muscles of the hip and extensor muscles of the knee and therefore, it is well suited for surgeries that involve the hip, the knee or the anterior thigh zone. The femoral nerve block is often associated with sciatic nerve block in order to achieve a lower extremity analgesia. The anterior approach to the femoral nerve block initially described as a 3-in-1 block by Winnie et al (Winnie et al., 1973), suggested that the femoral, lateral femoral cutaneous, and obturator nerves could be blocked from a single paravascular injection at a point inferior to the inguinal crease. Studies have since showed that the femoral can be reliably blocked by a single injection, the lateral femoral cutaneous nerves is blocked in 95%, but the obturator nerve is almost always spared (Parkinson et al., 1989). Therefore, a 3-in-1 block with the paravascular approach seems difficult to obtain, and, as a consequence, when all three nerves need to be anesthetized a posterior lumbar plexus block or a multitruncular block should be performed. The anterior approach to the femoral nerve is similar for "single shot" or continuous nerve blocks. A femoral nerve block can be obtained with single shot of local anesthetic or by using a continuous catheter technique. The localization of the femoral nerve can be obtained by the use of nerve stimulator or with ultrasound guidance. When using single shot technique, the local anesthetic agent is injected through the needle after location of the nerve with the nerve stimulator. When using continuous catheter techniques, the nerve can be stimulated via the needle through which the catheter is placed, or via both the needle and the catheter itself. This narrative review summarizes the evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective analysis, in order to determine the efficacy of continuous femoral nerve block comparing the use of stimulating catheters with non-stimulating catheters for lower-extremity surgery. Furthermore, we explore the adjunctive use of ultrasonography for femoral nerve block.

show abstract

Section: Study Description and Results (Table 2 )mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Salinas Et Al 2004mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Continuous Femoral Nerve Block with Stimulating Catheters Versus Nonstimulating Catheters - A Systematic-Narrative Review

Dauri¹,

Celidonio²,

Nahmias³

et al. 2012

Pain Management - Current Issues and Opinions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Salinas et al, who also conducted a study of volunteers, reported that after an infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine at 10 mLÁhr -1 through a femoral catheter, a subsequent quadriceps motor block developed within five hours after an initial recovery. 25 The relation between prolonged sitting and increased numbness and pinprick sensation with subsequent motor block remains unclear. The additional nerve compression could have led to an additional effect on nerve conduction or produced a more ''toxic'' level of local anesthetic, leading to impaired sensory and motor function.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Case report: Unusual complication during outpatient continuous regional popliteal analgesia

Saporito

Sturini²,

Petri

et al. 2012

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, no study has formally compared the equipment available for stimulating catheter insertion. RCTs have used alternately different kits: the Arrow StimuCath Continuous Nerve Block Set (Arrow international, Reading, PA, USA); [23][24][25]27 an 18G, 85-mm long needle, oversheathed with a plastic introducer set (Multiplex, Vygon, France); 28,29 a 50-mm, 18G needle with a stimulating catheter (Polymedic C-50 K +); 26 or a 22G, stimulating catheter with a 19.5G, 100-mm needle set (Stimulong Plus, Pajunk, Geisingen, Germany). 30 Further studies are required to compare the electrical properties of these kits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…in 20 healthy volunteers, Salinas et al 24 placed bilateral femoral catheters by randomizing one side to a non stimulating catheter and the contralateral side to a stimulating catheter (mean stimulation threshold of the catheter = 0.47 ± 0.05 mA; pulse width = 0.1 msec). Both catheters were bolused with 10 mL of lidocaine 1% and infused with ropivacaine 0.2% infusion (10 mL·hr -1 for four hours).…”

Section: Femoral Block (Fb)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasonography and stimulating perineural catheters for nerve blocks: a review of the evidence

Tran

Muñoz

Russo

et al. 2008

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This narrative review summarizes the evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) offering blinded assessment and sample size justification, in order to determine the benefits associated with adjunctive ultrasonography (US) and stimulating perineural catheters for nerve blocks. Source:The literature search for this review was conducted during the second week of December 2007 using the MEDLINE (January 1950 to November 2007 and EMBASE (January 1980 to November 2007) databases. For US-guided peripheral and neuraxial blocks, the following medical subject heading (MeSH) terms were searched: "nerve block", "epidural anesthesia", "epidural analgesia", "epidural injection", "epidural space", "spinal anesthesia", and "spinal injection", the results were combined with "ultrasonography" (MeSH term) and "ultrasound" (key word). For stimulating perineural catheters, the following MeSH terms were cross referenced with the MeSH term, "nerve block": "peripheral catheterization", "indwelling catheterization", "catheterization", and keywords, "nerve catheter" and "continuous". Subsequently, the result of this search was combined to "stimulating" (key word). Fifteen RCTs, offering blinded assessment and sample size justification, were retained for analysis.Principal findings: For axillary blocks, US guidance yields a higher success rate than a double-injection, transarterial and a triple-injection, neurostimulation-guided technique. Compared to a quadruple-stimulation technique, no major differences can be found. The addition of nerve stimulation to US guidance offers no clear benefits for axillary blocks. For femoral blocks, compared to neurostimulation, echoguidance is associated with a local anesthetic (LA) sparing effect (up to 42%). In children, US guidance yields a LA sparing effect and a longer duration of action for lower extremity nerve blocks.Compared to their blind counterparts, stimulating catheters seem to offer limited clinical benefits. Despite providing a sparing effect on LA and opioid consumption, stimulating catheters are not associated with a decrease in side effects or analgesiarelated expenditures. Conclusions Sources : La recherche de littérature pour cet article de synthèse a été menée la deuxième semaine de décembre 2007 dans les bases de données MEDLINE (janvier 1950 à novembre 2007) et EMBASE (janvier 1980 à novembre 2007). Pour les blocs périphériques et neuraxiaux échoguidés, les termes MeSH suivants ont été recherchés : « nerve block », « epidural anesthesia », « epidural analgesia », « epidural injection », « epidural space », « spinal anesthesia » et « spinal injection », et ont été associés à « ultrasonography »

show abstract

Prospective comparison of continuous femoral nerve block with nonstimulating catheter placement versus stimulating catheter-guided perineural placement in volunteers ,

Cited by 49 publications

References 27 publications

Efficacy of Continuous Femoral Nerve Block with Stimulating Catheters Versus Nonstimulating Catheters - A Systematic-Narrative Review

Efficacy of Continuous Femoral Nerve Block with Stimulating Catheters Versus Nonstimulating Catheters - A Systematic-Narrative Review

Case report: Unusual complication during outpatient continuous regional popliteal analgesia

Ultrasonography and stimulating perineural catheters for nerve blocks: a review of the evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About