The learning process of the hydrolocalization technique performed during ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia

Effects of hydrodissection on anesthesia characteristics in ultrasound guided infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade

BACKGROUND

The development of ultrasonography technology and its widespread application have increased peripheral nerve block applications, especially in limb surgeries, since it reduces complication rates and increases success rates in peripheral nerve block applications. However, even experienced physicians need to direct a large number of needles and injections for adequate local anesthetic spread, which can cause accidental vascular puncture and local anesthetic systemic toxicity. Such complications can be prevented by hydrodissection and a safer and successful anesthesia can be provided to patients in this study, it was aimed to investigate the effects of hydrodissection on anesthesia characteristics in the infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety patients were included in our study after approval by the Ethics Committee. These patients were randomly divided into 2 groups (Group I: Infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade with normal method and Group II: infraclavicular brachial plexus blockade with hydrodissection). After obtaining patient consent, monitoring and vascular access were provided. Group I patients were mixed with 30 mL of local anesthetic mixture (15 mL of distilled water and 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine), and Group II patients were treated with 15 mL of distilled water by hydrodissection and 15 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine anesthesia resident. Block characteristics were evaluated and recorded every 5 minutes for the first 30 minutes by a blinded observer. The sensory block score was 7, the total score was 14 or above, and the block was considered successful, and the patient was ready for surgery. Postoperative block removal times, analgesia, and complications were evaluated and recorded.

RESULTS

A significant difference was found between the sensory and motor block onset times and postoperative VAS scores between the normal and hydrodissection groups (P < .05). There were no significant differences in terms of block application times, postoperative block removal times, and complications between the groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study, it has been shown that hydrodissection in peripheral nerve blocks does not lag in terms of block success and characteristics compared to normal methods, whereas anesthetists with less experience in peripheral nerve block experience obtain safer and more successful results in practice.

Ultrasound-Guided Nerve Blocks as Analgesia for Nonoperative Management of Distal Radius Fractures-Two Consecutive Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether a conventional fracture hematoma block (FHB) or an ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block has more superior analgesic effect during nonoperative management of distal radius fractures in an emergency department setting. Two peripheral nerve block types were investigated, one at the level of the elbow, or cubital nerve block (CNB), and another an axillary nerve block (ANB).

DESIGN

Two prospective randomized controlled studies were performed to compare the difference in pain intensity during closed reduction of a distal radius fracture between FHB-, CNB-, and, ANB-treated patients.

SETTING

Level 2 trauma center.

PATIENTS

One hundred ten patients with radiographic displaced distal radius fractures were randomized. Fifty patients were randomized between FHB and CNB, and 60 patients were randomized between CNB and ANB.

INTERVENTION

FHB, CNB, or ANB. These were performed by 3 physicians new to ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks and trained before onset of this study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

Pain was sequentially measured using an NRS during closed distal radius fracture reduction.

RESULTS

CNB patients experienced less pain during block procedure (P = 0.002), finger trap traction (P = 0.007), fracture reduction (P = 0.00001), after plaster cast application (P = 0.01), and after control radiography (P = 0.01). In our second study, ANB-treated patients reported less pain during block procedure (P = 0.04), during finger trap traction (P < 0.0001), fracture reduction (P < 0.0001), after plaster cast application (P = 0.0001), and after control radiography (P = 0.0005).

CONCLUSIONS

Although participating clinicians had minimal expertise using ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks, nonoperative management of distal radius fracture using an ANB was less painful. These block types are expected to completely eradicate sensation the best. Future studies should address technical factors including adequate placement and time to let the block set up, as well as issues such as resource utilization including time and clinician availability to better determine the relative advantages and disadvantages to other analgesia techniques such as the FHB.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided sacroiliac joint intra-articular injections in the noninflammatory sacroiliac joint dysfunction: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term effects and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections with fluoroscopy (FL)-guided SIJ injections in patients with noninflammatory SIJ dysfunction.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

University hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (N=120) with noninflammatory sacroiliac arthritis were enrolled.

INTERVENTION

All procedures were performed using an FL or US apparatus. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the FL or US group. Immediately after the SIJ injections, fluoroscopy was applied to verify the correct placement of the injected medication and intravascular injections.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Treatment effects and functional improvement were compared at 2 and 12 weeks after the procedures.

RESULTS

The verbal numeric pain scale and Oswestry Disability Index improved at 2 and 12 weeks after the injections without statistical significances between groups. Of 55 US-guided injections, 48 (87.3%) were successful and 7 (12.7%) were missed. The FL-guided SIJ approach exhibited a greater accuracy (98.2%) than the US-guided approach. Vascularization around the SIJ was seen in 34 of 55 patients. Among the 34 patients, 7 had vascularization inside the joint, 23 had vascularization around the joint, and 4 had vascularization both inside and around the joint. Three cases of intravascular injections occurred in the FL group.

CONCLUSIONS

The US-guided approach may facilitate the identification and avoidance of the critical vessels around or within the SIJ. Function and pain relief significantly improved in both groups without significant differences between groups. The US-guided approach was shown to be as effective as the FL-guided approach in treatment effects. However, diagnostic application in the SIJ may be limited because of the significantly lower accuracy rate (87.3%).