A Randomized Trial of Ultrasound-guided Brachial Plexus Anaesthesia in Upper Limb Surgery

Neurological injury following peripheral nerve blocks: a narrative review of estimates of risks and the influence of ultrasound guidance

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve injury or post-block neurological dysfunction (PBND) are uncommon but a recognized complications of peripheral nerve blocks (PNB). A broad range of its incidence is noted in the literature and hence a critical appraisal of its occurrence is needed.

OBJECTIVE

In this review, we wanted to know the pooled estimates of PBND and further, determine its pooled estimates following various PNB over time. Additionally, we also sought to estimate the incidence of PBND with or without US guidance.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A literature search was conducted in six databases. For the purposes of the review, we defined PBND as any new-onset sensorimotor disturbances in the distribution of the performed PNB either attributable to the PNB (when reported) or reported in the context of the PNB (when association with a PNB was not mentioned). Both prospective and retrospective studies which provided incidence of PBND at timepoints of interest (>48 hours to <2 weeks; >2 weeks to 6 weeks, 7 weeks to 5 months, 6 months to 1 year and >1 year durations) were included for review. Incidence data were used to provide pooled estimates (with 95% CI) of PBND at these time periods. Similar estimates were obtained to know the incidence of PBND with or without the use of US guidance. Additionally, PBND associated with individual PNB were obtained in a similar fashion with upper and lower limb PNB classified based on the anatomical location of needle insertion.

FINDINGS

The overall incidence of PBND decreased with time, with the incidence being approximately 1% at <2 weeks' time (Incidence per thousand (95% CI)= 9 (8; to 11)) to approximately 3/10 000 at 1 year (Incidence per thousand (95% CI)= 0. 3 (0.1; to 0.5)). Incidence of PBND differed for individual PNB with the highest incidence noted for interscalene block.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review adds information to existing literature that the neurological complications are rarer but seem to display a higher incidence for some blocks more than others. Use of US guidance may be associated with a lower incidence of PBND especially in those PNBs reporting a higher pooled estimates. Future studies need to standardize the reporting of PBND at various timepoints and its association to PNB.

Impact of Peripheral Nerve Block Technique on Incidence of Phrenic Nerve Palsy in Shoulder Surgery

Peripheral nerve blocks are an increasingly common method of providing postoperative analgesia for shoulder surgeries. However, the standard technique, the interscalene block (ISB), inevitably causes hemidiaphragmatic paresis (HDP), secondary to phrenic nerve palsy. This can cause morbidity in patients with preexisting respiratory compromise, prompting investigation into alternative "phrenic-sparing" nerve blocks. The aim of this review was to give an overview of these blocks and critically evaluate the current literature to determine if any are suitable replacements for ISB. The incidence of HDP and analgesic efficacy were considered. We queried four electronic databases and one register. Twenty-eight original articles were selected for review. The use of ultrasound guidance, lower volumes of local anaesthetic (LA), and injection 4 mm outside the brachial plexus fascia reduced HDP incidence for the ISB; however, no single modification did so sufficiently. While the anterior suprascapular nerve block (SSNB) showed comparable analgesic effects to the ISB, HDP prevalence was also high. The posterior SSNB produced consistently low HDP incidences but also inferior analgesia to ISB, except when combined with an infraclavicular brachial plexus block. The superior trunk block (STB) provided equivalent analgesia to the ISB while reducing HDP incidence, but not significantly. Lower LA volumes consistently led to lower HDP incidence across all blocks, likely due to a reduced ability to spread to the phrenic nerve. Further investigation into the minimum effective volumes of the extrafascial ISB, anterior SSNB, STB, and combined posterior SSNB with infraclavicular block is warranted to determine if any of these blocks can successfully balance HDP prevention with analgesic efficacy.

Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Nerve Blocks Performed by Orthopedic Surgeons: A Retrospective, Multicenter Study in Akita Prefecture, Japan

The shortage of doctors is a societal problem, especially in rural areas such as Akita Prefecture, Japan. Therefore, it is not unusual in Akita for orthopedic surgeons to perform upper and lower limb surgeries under ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks managed by the operators themselves. Multicenter studies of ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks performed by orthopedic surgeons have not been reported. The purpose of this study was to clarify the safety and reliability of ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks performed by orthopedic surgeons in Akita. A total of 1,674 upper extremity surgery cases operated under ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks at 8 hospitals in Akita prefecture from April 2016 to April 2018 were investigated retrospectively. These blocks were performed by a total of 37 orthopedic surgeons, including senior surgeons and residents. In 321 of the 1,674 cases (19%), local anesthetics were added to the surgical field. Two cases with special factors were converted to general anesthesia. There were 2 cases of complications associated with the nerve block, but they were all transient and recovered promptly. The block site and the hospital where the block was performed showed a significant relationship with the addition of local anesthetics to the surgical site (P < 0.001). Surgery time, age at surgery, and surgical site showed no significant relationships with the addition of local anesthetics. The volume of the anesthetic used for the nerve block showed a significant inverse relationship with the addition of local anesthetics (P=0.040). Many orthopedic surgeons in Akita prefecture began to perform ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks, which had a reliable anesthesia effect with no noticeable complications, whether performed by residents or senior orthopedic surgeons, and this is a useful anesthetic technique for orthopedic surgeons.

A Comparative Clinical Study of Ultrasonography-Guided Perivascular and Perineural Axillary Brachial Plexus Block for Upper Limb Surgeries

Background:

Axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB) is safest among other methods of brachial plexus block because of its ease and reliability. The two approaches of ultrasonography-guided ABPB are perivascular (PV) and perineural (PN).

Aims:

This study was conducted to compare primary outcomes such as performance time, onset of the block, number of needle passes, block success rate, duration of sensory and motor block, and complications between ultrasound-guided PV and PN ABPB in patients posted for upper limb surgeries.

Settings and Design:

This prospective randomized study was conducted on 106 patients American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I and II posted for forearm, wrist, and hand surgeries, who were allotted into Group PV and Group PN 53 each.

Materials and Methods:

In both methods, 20 mL of the drug was used. To start with, musculocutaneous nerve was blocked with 5 mL of the drug. In the PV technique, remaining 15 mL of the drug was deposited anterior and posterior to axillary artery, and in PN technique, 5 mL of the drug was injected around radial, ulnar, and median nerve.

Statistical Analysis:

Mann–Whitney and Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis.

Results:

Significant difference was observed between the two groups in performance time (PV – 8.647 ± 0.54 min and PN – 14.53 ± 0.20 min), onset time (PV – 19.48 ± 2.83 min and PN – 13.86 ± 1.81 min), and number of needle passes (PV – 2.30 ± 0.50 and PN – 4.91 ± 0.66). Other parameters were comparable in both the groups.

Conclusions:

Ultrasound-guided PV axillary plexus block is better than PN axillary plexus block with respect to performance time and number of needle passes; but onset time was shorter in PN block, with precaution eliminating the risk of complications.

Peripheral Nerve Injury Following Interscalene Blocks: A Systematic Review to Guide Orthopedic Surgeons

The purpose of this review was to determine the incidence and duration of peripheral neurologic symptoms following interscalene blocks for shoulder surgery. Three databases were reviewed for subjective and objective injuries by guidance modality and delivery method. The incidence of neurologic injuries following single site injection interscalene blocks, 3.16%, was significantly less than the 5.24% incidence for continuous catheter infusion interscalene blocks. Less than 0.51% of peripheral neurologic symptoms persisted beyond 1 year for both groups. There is a notable risk of injury following interscalene blocks by all modes of guidance and anesthetic technique, but only a small percentage of injuries persist. [Orthopedics. 2018; 41(5):e598-e606.].

Emergency physician-performed ultrasound-guided nerve blocks in proximal femoral fractures provide safe and effective pain relief: a prospective observational study in The Netherlands

Background

The treatment of acute pain in the emergency department is not always optimal. Peripheral nerve blocks using “blind” or nerve stimulator techniques have substantial disadvantages. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia may provide quick, safe, and effective pain relief in patients with proximal femoral fractures with severe pain. However, no evidence exists on emergency physician-performed ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia in these patients in Dutch emergency departments. We hypothesized that emergency physicians can be effectively trained to safely perform and implement ultrasound-guided femoral nerve blocks, resulting in effective pain relief in patients with proximal femoral fractures.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, emergency physicians were trained by expert anesthesiologists to perform ultrasound-guided femoral nerve blocks during a single-day course. Femoral nerve blocks were performed on patients with proximal femoral fractures. A system of direct supervision by skilled anesthesiologists and residents was put in place.

Results

A total of 64 femoral nerve blocks were performed. After 30 min, blocks were effective in 69% of patients, and after 60 min, in 83.3%. The mean reduction in pain scores after 30 and 60 min was 3.84 and 4.77, respectively (both p <  0.001).

Patients reported a mean satisfaction of 8.42 (1 to 10 scale). No adverse events occurred.

Conclusions

Ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block is an effective, safe, and easy to learn (single-day course) procedure for emergency physicians to implement and perform in the emergency department. Patient satisfaction was high.

Efficacy of ultrasound and nerve stimulation guidance in peripheral nerve block: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Evidence was controversial about whether nerve stimulation (NS) can optimize ultrasound guidance (US)-guided nerve blockade for peripheral nerve block. This review aims to explore the effects of the two combined techniques. We searched EMBASE (from 1974 to March 2015), PubMed (from 1966 to Mar 2015), Medline (from 1966 to Mar 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and clinicaltrials.gov. Finally, 15 randomized trials were included into analysis involving 1,019 lower limb and 696 upper limb surgery cases. Meta-analysis indicated that, compared with US alone, USNS combination had favorable effects on overall block success rate (risk ratio [RR] 1.17; confidence interval [CI] 1.05 to 1.30, P = 0.004), sensory block success rate (RR 1.56; CI 1.29 to 1.89, P < 0.00001), and block onset time (mean difference [MD] -3.84; CI -5.59 to -2.08, P < 0.0001). USNS guidance had a longer procedure time in both upper and lower limb nerve block (MD 1.67; CI 1.32 to 2.02, P < 0.00001; MD 1.17; CI 0.95 to 1.39, P < 0.00001) and more patients with anesthesia supplementation (RR 2.5; CI 1.02 to 6.13, P = 0.05). USNS guidance trends to result in a shorter block onset time than US alone as well as higher block success rate, but no statistical difference was demonstrated, as more data are required. © 2017 IUBMB Life, 69(9):720-734, 2017.

Use of the cumulative sum method (CUSUM) to assess the learning curves of ultrasound-guided continuous femoral nerve block

BACKGROUND

Although ultrasound is a basic competence for anaesthesia residents (AR) there is few data available on the learning process. This prospective observational study aims to assess the learning process of ultrasound-guided continuous femoral nerve block and to determine the number of procedures that a resident would need to perform in order to reach proficiency using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method.

METHODS

We recruited 19 AR without previous experience. Learning curves were constructed using the CUSUM method for ultrasound-guided continuous femoral nerve block considering 2 success criteria: a decrease of pain score>2 in a [0-10] scale after 15minutes, and time required to perform it.

RESULTS

We analyse data from 17 AR for a total of 237 ultrasound-guided continuous femoral nerve blocks. 8/17 AR became proficient for pain relief, however all the AR who did more than 12 blocks (8/8) became proficient. As for time of performance 5/17 of AR achieved the objective of 12minutes, however all the AR who did more than 20 blocks (4/4) achieved it.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of procedures needed to achieve proficiency seems to be 12, however it takes more procedures to reduce performance time. The CUSUM methodology could be useful in training programs to allow early interventions in case of repeated failures, and develop competence-based curriculum.

Comparison of the Supraclavicular, Infraclavicular and Axillary Approaches for Ultrasound-Guided Brachial Plexus Block for Surgical Anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

We 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.

METHODS

This 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.

RESULTS

A 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.

CONCLUSIONS

All 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.).

[Ultrasound guidance improves the success rate of axillary plexus block: a meta-analysis]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the value of real-time ultrasound (US) guidance for axillary brachial plexus block (AXB) through the success rate and the onset time.

METHODS

The meta-analysis was carried out in the Anesthesiology Department of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China. A literature search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane database from the years 2004 to 2014 was performed. The literature searches were carried out using medical subject headings and free-text word: "axilla", "axillary", "brachial plexus", "ultrasonography", "ultrasound", "ultrasonics". Two different reviewers carried out the search and evaluated studies independently.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials, one cohort study and three retrospective studies were included. A total of 2042 patients were identified. 1157 patients underwent AXB using US guidance (US group) and the controlled group included 885 patients (246 patients using traditional approach (TRAD) and 639 patients using nerve stimulation (NS)). Our analysis showed that the success rate was higher in the US group compared to the controlled group (90.64% vs. 82.21%, p<0.00001). The average time to perform the block and the onset of sensory time were shorter in the US group than the controlled group.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated that the real-time ultrasound guidance for axillary brachial plexus block improves the success rate and reduce the mean time to onset of anesthesia and the time of block performance.

Ultrasound guidance improves the success rate of axillary plexus block: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the value of real-time ultrasound (US) guidance for axillary brachial plexus block (AXB) through the success rate and the onset time.

METHODS

The meta-analysis was carried out in the Anesthesiology Department of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China. A literature search of Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane database from the years 2004 to 2014 was performed. The literature searches were carried out using medical subject headings and free-text word: "axilla", "axillary", "brachial plexus", "ultrasonography", "ultrasound", "ultrasonics". Two different reviewers carried out the search and evaluated studies independently.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials, one cohort study and three retrospective studies were included. A total of 2042 patients were identified. 1157 patients underwent AXB using US guidance (US group) and the controlled group included 885 patients (246 patients using traditional approach (TRAD) and 639 patients using nerve stimulation (NS)). Our analysis showed that the success rate was higher in the US group compared to the controlled group (90.64% vs. 82.21%, p<0.00001). The average time to perform the block and the onset of sensory time were shorter in the US group than the controlled group.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated that the real-time ultrasound guidance for axillary brachial plexus block improves the success rate and reduce the mean time to onset of anesthesia and the time of block performance.

Ultrasound guidance for upper and lower limb blocks

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve blocks can be performed using ultrasound guidance. It is not yet clear whether this method of nerve location has benefits over other existing methods. This review was originally published in 2009 and was updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess whether the use of ultrasound to guide peripheral nerve blockade has any advantages over other methods of peripheral nerve location. Specifically, we have asked whether the use of ultrasound guidance:1. improves success rates and effectiveness of regional anaesthetic blocks, by increasing the number of blocks that are assessed as adequate2. reduces the complications, such as cardiorespiratory arrest, pneumothorax or vascular puncture, associated with the performance of regional anaesthetic blocks

SEARCH METHODS

In the 2014 update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 8); MEDLINE (July 2008 to August 2014); EMBASE (July 2008 to August 2014); ISI Web of Science (2008 to April 2013); CINAHL (July 2014); and LILACS (July 2008 to August 2014). We completed forward and backward citation and clinical trials register searches.The original search was to July 2008. We reran the search in May 2015. We have added 11 potential new studies of interest to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will incorporate them into the formal review findings during future review updates.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block of the upper and lower limbs, alone or combined, with at least one other method of nerve location. In the 2014 update, we excluded studies that had given general anaesthetic, spinal, epidural or other nerve blocks to all participants, as well as those measuring the minimum effective dose of anaesthetic drug. This resulted in the exclusion of five studies from the original review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, including an assessment of risk of bias and degree of practitioner experience for all studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 RCTs with 2844 adult participants. Twenty-six assessed upper-limb and six assessed lower-limb blocks. Seventeen compared ultrasound with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), and nine compared ultrasound combined with nerve stimulation (US + NS) against PNS alone. Two studies compared ultrasound with anatomical landmark technique, one with a transarterial approach, and three were three-arm designs that included US, US + PNS and PNS.There were variations in the quality of evidence, with a lack of detail in many of the studies to judge whether randomization, allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessors was sufficient. It was not possible to blind practitioners and there was therefore a high risk of performance bias across all studies, leading us to downgrade the evidence for study limitations using GRADE. There was insufficient detail on the experience and expertise of practitioners and whether experience was equivalent between intervention and control.We performed meta-analysis for our main outcomes. We found that ultrasound guidance produces superior peripheral nerve block success rates, with more blocks being assessed as sufficient for surgery following sensory or motor testing (Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) odds ratio (OR), fixed-effect 2.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.14 to 4.04); 1346 participants), and fewer blocks requiring supplementation or conversion to general anaesthetic (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.28 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.39); 1807 participants) compared with the use of PNS, anatomical landmark techniques or a transarterial approach. We were not concerned by risks of indirectness, imprecision or inconsistency for these outcomes and used GRADE to assess these outcomes as being of moderate quality. Results were similarly advantageous for studies comparing US + PNS with NS alone for the above outcomes (M-H OR, fixed-effect 3.33 (95% CI 2.13 to 5.20); 719 participants, and M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.34 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.56); 712 participants respectively). There were lower incidences of paraesthesia in both the ultrasound comparison groups (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.42 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.76); 471 participants, and M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.97 (95% CI 0.30 to 3.12); 178 participants respectively) and lower incidences of vascular puncture in both groups (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.19 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.57); 387 participants, and M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.22 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.90); 143 participants). There were fewer studies for these outcomes and we therefore downgraded both for imprecision and paraesthesia for potential publication bias. This gave an overall GRADE assessment of very low and low for these two outcomes respectively. Our analysis showed that it took less time to perform nerve blocks in the ultrasound group (mean difference (MD), IV, fixed-effect -1.06 (95% CI -1.41 to -0.72); 690 participants) but more time to perform the block when ultrasound was combined with a PNS technique (MD, IV, fixed-effect 0.76 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.98); 587 participants). With high levels of unexplained statistical heterogeneity, we graded this outcome as very low quality. We did not combine data for other outcomes as study results had been reported using differing scales or with a combination of mean and median data, but our interpretation of individual study data favoured ultrasound for a reduction in other minor complications and reduction in onset time of block and number of attempts to perform block.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that peripheral nerve blocks performed by ultrasound guidance alone, or in combination with PNS, are superior in terms of improved sensory and motor block, reduced need for supplementation and fewer minor complications reported. Using ultrasound alone shortens performance time when compared with nerve stimulation, but when used in combination with PNS it increases performance time.We were unable to determine whether these findings reflect the use of ultrasound in experienced hands and it was beyond the scope of this review to consider the learning curve associated with peripheral nerve blocks by ultrasound technique compared with other methods.

Ultrasound guidance for upper and lower limb blocks

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve blocks can be performed using ultrasound guidance. It is not yet clear whether this method of nerve location has benefits over other existing methods. This review was originally published in 2009 and was updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess whether the use of ultrasound to guide peripheral nerve blockade has any advantages over other methods of peripheral nerve location. Specifically, we have asked whether the use of ultrasound guidance:1. improves success rates and effectiveness of regional anaesthetic blocks, by increasing the number of blocks that are assessed as adequate2. reduces the complications, such as cardiorespiratory arrest, pneumothorax or vascular puncture, associated with the performance of regional anaesthetic blocks

SEARCH METHODS

In the 2014 update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 8); MEDLINE (July 2008 to August 2014); EMBASE (July 2008 to August 2014); ISI Web of Science (2008 to April 2013); CINAHL (July 2014); and LILACS (July 2008 to August 2014). We completed forward and backward citation and clinical trials register searches.The original search was to July 2008. We reran the search in May 2015. We have added 11 potential new studies of interest to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will incorporate them into the formal review findings during future review updates.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block of the upper and lower limbs, alone or combined, with at least one other method of nerve location. In the 2014 update, we excluded studies that had given general anaesthetic, spinal, epidural or other nerve blocks to all participants, as well as those measuring the minimum effective dose of anaesthetic drug. This resulted in the exclusion of five studies from the original review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, including an assessment of risk of bias and degree of practitioner experience for all studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 RCTs with 2844 adult participants. Twenty-six assessed upper-limb and six assessed lower-limb blocks. Seventeen compared ultrasound with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), and nine compared ultrasound combined with nerve stimulation (US + NS) against PNS alone. Two studies compared ultrasound with anatomical landmark technique, one with a transarterial approach, and three were three-arm designs that included US, US + PNS and PNS.There were variations in the quality of evidence, with a lack of detail in many of the studies to judge whether randomization, allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessors was sufficient. It was not possible to blind practitioners and there was therefore a high risk of performance bias across all studies, leading us to downgrade the evidence for study limitations using GRADE. There was insufficient detail on the experience and expertise of practitioners and whether experience was equivalent between intervention and control.We performed meta-analysis for our main outcomes. We found that ultrasound guidance produces superior peripheral nerve block success rates, with more blocks being assessed as sufficient for surgery following sensory or motor testing (Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) odds ratio (OR), fixed-effect 2.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.14 to 4.04); 1346 participants), and fewer blocks requiring supplementation or conversion to general anaesthetic (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.28 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.39); 1807 participants) compared with the use of PNS, anatomical landmark techniques or a transarterial approach. We were not concerned by risks of indirectness, imprecision or inconsistency for these outcomes and used GRADE to assess these outcomes as being of moderate quality. Results were similarly advantageous for studies comparing US + PNS with NS alone for the above outcomes (M-H OR, fixed-effect 3.33 (95% CI 2.13 to 5.20); 719 participants, and M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.34 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.56); 712 participants respectively). There were lower incidences of paraesthesia in both the ultrasound comparison groups (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.42 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.76); 471 participants, and M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.97 (95% CI 0.30 to 3.12); 178 participants respectively) and lower incidences of vascular puncture in both groups (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.19 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.57); 387 participants, and M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.22 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.90); 143 participants). There were fewer studies for these outcomes and we therefore downgraded both for imprecision and paraesthesia for potential publication bias. This gave an overall GRADE assessment of very low and low for these two outcomes respectively. Our analysis showed that it took less time to perform nerve blocks in the ultrasound group (mean difference (MD), IV, fixed-effect -1.06 (95% CI -1.41 to -0.72); 690 participants) but more time to perform the block when ultrasound was combined with a PNS technique (MD, IV, fixed-effect 0.76 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.98); 587 participants). With high levels of unexplained statistical heterogeneity, we graded this outcome as very low quality. We did not combine data for other outcomes as study results had been reported using differing scales or with a combination of mean and median data, but our interpretation of individual study data favoured ultrasound for a reduction in other minor complications and reduction in onset time of block and number of attempts to perform block.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that peripheral nerve blocks performed by ultrasound guidance alone, or in combination with PNS, are superior in terms of improved sensory and motor block, reduced need for supplementation and fewer minor complications reported. Using ultrasound alone shortens performance time when compared with nerve stimulation, but when used in combination with PNS it increases performance time.We were unable to determine whether these findings reflect the use of ultrasound in experienced hands and it was beyond the scope of this review to consider the learning curve associated with peripheral nerve blocks by ultrasound technique compared with other methods.

Comparison of ultrasound-guided supraclavicular, infraclavicular and below-C6 interscalene brachial plexus block for upper limb surgery: a randomised, observer-blinded study

This prospective, randomised, observer-blinded study was conducted to compare the ease of performance and surgical effectiveness of interscalene block below the C6 nerve root with supraclavicular and infraclavicular techniques of brachial plexus block for upper arm and forearm surgery. Sixty adult patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1 to 3, undergoing upper limb surgery, were randomly allocated into three groups. Group SC received supraclavicular blockade, group IC received infraclavicular blockade and Group IS received interscalene blockade. All blocks were guided by ultrasound with nerve stimulator confirmation. The anaesthetic mixture consisted of 0.5 ml/kg of equal volumes of 0.75% ropivacaine and 2% lignocaine-adrenaline. The imaging and block performance time, onset time, success rate, duration of block, and duration of postoperative analgesia were recorded by a blinded observer. The onset time was significantly longer in the interscalene group as compared with supraclavicular and infraclavicular approaches. The imaging time and block performance time were comparable between groups. No significant differences were observed between the three groups in terms of block-related pain scores, success rates, duration of block or of postoperative analgesia. Two patients in the interscalene group developed clinically detectable phrenic nerve palsy. Our findings indicate that, although interscalene block below the C6 nerve root can provide surgical anaesthesia for forearm and hand surgery, it appears to have a longer onset time than supra- and infraclavicular approaches and an unacceptable incidence of phrenic nerve palsy.

Comparison of peripheral nerve stimulator versus ultrasonography guided axillary block using multiple injection technique

Background:

The established methods of nerve location were based on either proper motor response on nerve stimulation (NS) or ultrasound guidance. In this prospective, randomised, observer-blinded study, we compared ultrasound guidance with NS for axillary brachial plexus block using 0.5% bupivacaine with the multiple injection techniques.

Methods:

A total of 120 patients receiving axillary brachial plexus block with 0.5% bupivacaine, using a multiple injection technique, were randomly allocated to receive either NS (group NS, n = 60), or ultrasound guidance (group US, n = 60) for nerve location. A blinded observer recorded the onset of sensory and motor blocks, skin punctures, needle redirections, procedure-related pain and patient satisfaction.

Results:

The median (range) number of skin punctures were 2 (2–4) in group US and 3 (2–5) in group NS (P < 0.001). No differences were observed in the onset of sensory block in group NS (6.17 ± 1.22 min) and in group US (6.33 ± 0.48 min) (P = 0.16), and in onset of motor block (23.33 ± 1.26 min) in group US and (23.17 ± 1.79 min) in group NS; P > =0.27). Insufficient block was observed in three patient (5%) of group US and four patients (6.67%) of group NS (P > =0.35). Patient acceptance was similarly good in the two groups.

Conclusion:

Multiple injection axillary blocks with ultrasound guidance provided similar success rates and comparable incidence of complications as compared with NS guidance with 20 ml 0.5% bupivacaine.

Feasibility of Early and Repeated Low-dose Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block for Residual Pain in Acute Cervical Radiculopathy Treated with NSAIDS

Background

To improve residual pain management in acute cervical radiculopathy treated with NSAIDs, the feasibility of early and repeated low-dose interscalene brachial plexus block (IS-BPB) needs to be assessed.

Methods

This was a prospective study on patients receiving NSAIDs (loxoprofen) for cervical radiculopathy of ≤ 2-week onset. Pain was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS). A low-dose ultrasonography (USG)-guided IS-BPB (dexamethasone [1.65 mg; 0.5 ml] and mepivacaine [1%; 3.0 ml]) was performed at baseline and weekly thereafter for 4 weeks in an outpatient setting for the intervention group. All patients were evaluated using a visual satisfaction score (VSS) at week 4. Patients with baseline VAS scores < 70 (mild to moderate pain; MM group) and ≥ 70 (severe pain; SE group) were compared to the controls receiving NSAIDs.

Results

A total of 316 IS-BPBs were performed in the intervention group. There was a significant difference in the decline in the VAS from week 0 to week 3 in the MM and SE groups (P < 0.05); however, from week 3 to week 4, the therapeutic effect exhibited no significant difference. Thirteen patients at week 2 (15.5%; MM: 27.7%; SE: 0%), 43 at week 3 (51.2%; MM: 83.0%; SE: 10.8%), and 47 at week 4 (56.0%; MM: 85.1%; SE: 18.9%) achieved a VAS score of ≤ 20. Patient satisfaction was high, and the decrease in VAS scores in both groups was significant (P < 0.05) compared to the controls.

Conclusions

Weekly, low-dose, USG-guided IS-BPB can be implemented for early pain relief in acute cervical radiculopathy, with high patient satisfaction.

Core review: physician-performed ultrasound: the time has come for routine use in acute care medicine

The use of ultrasound in the acute care specialties of anesthesiology, intensive care, emergency medicine, and surgery has evolved from discrete, office-based echocardiographic examinations to the real-time or point-of-care clinical assessment and interventions. "Goal-focused" transthoracic echocardiography is a limited scope (as compared with comprehensive examination) echocardiographic examination, performed by the treating clinician in acute care medical practice, and is aimed at addressing specific clinical concerns. In the future, the practice of surface ultrasound will be integrated into the everyday clinical practice as ultrasound-assisted examination and ultrasound-guided procedures. This evolution should start at the medical student level and be reinforced throughout specialist training. The key to making ultrasound available to every physician is through education programs designed to facilitate uptake, rather than to prevent access to this technology and education by specialist craft groups. There is evidence that diagnosis is improved with ultrasound examination, yet data showing change in management and improvement in patient outcome are few and an important area for future research.

Analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia: a meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine if the use of ultrasound guidance (vs non-ultrasound techniques) improves the success rate of nerve blocks.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the published literature.

SETTING

University medical center.

MEASUREMENTS

16 RCTs of patients undergoing elective surgical procedures were studied. Patients underwent ultrasound-guided or non-ultrasound techniques (nerve stimulation, surface landmark) for peripheral nerve blocks. Success rates were measured.

MAIN RESULTS

Ultrasound guidance (vs all non-ultrasound techniques) was associated with a significant increase in the success rate of nerve blocks [relative risk (RR) = 1.11 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06 to 1.17, P < 0.0001]). When compared with nerve stimulator techniques only, ultrasound guidance was still associated with an increase in the success rate (RR = 1.11 [95% CI: 1.05 to 1.17, P = 0.0001]). For specific blocks, ultrasound guidance (vs all non-ultrasound) was associated with a significant increase in successful brachial plexus (all) nerve blocks (RR = 1.11 [95% CI: 1.05 to 1.20, P = 0.0001]), sciatic popliteal nerve block (RR = 1.22 [95% CI: 1.08 to 1.39, P = 0.002]) and brachial plexus axillary nerve block (RR = 1.13 [95% CI: 1.00 to 1.26, P = 0.05]) but not brachial plexus infraclavicular nerve block (RR = 1.25 [95% CI: 0.88 to 1.76, P = 0.22]).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block is associated with an increased overall success rate when compared with nerve stimulation or other methods. Ultrasound-guided techniques also increase the success rate of some specific blocks.

Is ultrasound guidance advantageous for interventional pain management? A review of acute pain outcomes

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound (US) guidance for peripheral nerve blockade has gained popularity worldwide. The reported benefits of real-time sonographic visualization compared with traditional nerve localization techniques generally apply to procedural and technical block-related outcomes whereas acute pain-related outcomes are featured less prominently. In this review, we evaluated the effect of US guidance compared with traditional nerve localization techniques for interventional management of acute pain and acute pain-related outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (from January 1990 to January 2011) to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of US guidance on acute pain and related outcomes compared with traditional nerve localization techniques. Studies were excluded if they did not report at least one of the following acute pain outcomes: pain severity, opioid consumption, sensory block duration, and time to first analgesic request. Related outcomes were classified as follows: patient related (opioid-related adverse effects, patient satisfaction, postoperative cognitive deficit); anesthesia related (unwanted motor block, perineural catheter failure, morbidity, development of chronic pain); surgery related (hospital readmission, ability to ambulate); and hospital related (length of stay, cost). Promising novel applications of US guidance for acute pain management were also sought for discussion purposes.

RESULTS

We identified 23 randomized controlled trials, including 1674 patients, that compared US guidance with and without peripheral nerve stimulation with peripheral nerve stimulation alone or anatomical landmark techniques. Of the 16 studies that evaluated pain severity, 8 reported improvement with US guidance; however, only 1 study reported a difference between US guidance and the comparator of >1 interval on the numeric rating pain scale. Eight studies evaluated sensory block duration and 3 of these reported prolonged block duration with US guidance. Seven studies evaluated opioid consumption, of which 3 reported a reduction with US guidance. Three studies evaluated time to first analgesic request, of which 2 favored US guidance. We uncovered no significant differences between US guidance and traditional nerve localization techniques for any other related outcome. US guidance was not found to be inferior compared with traditional nerve localization techniques for any outcome. Nonrandomized data suggest that US-guided transversus abdominis plane blocks may offer analgesic benefit over standard analgesic therapy, but has not been compared with an anatomical landmark technique.

CONCLUSIONS

At present, there is insufficient evidence in the contemporary literature to define the effect of US guidance on acute pain and related outcomes compared with traditional nerve localization techniques for interventional acute pain management.

Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia for peripheral nerve blocks: an evidence-based outcome review

Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia (UGRA) has increased in popularity over the past 5 years. This interest is reflected by the plethora of publications devoted to technique development, as well as randomized and controlled trials. Despite the excitement around ultrasonography, skeptics argue that there is a lack of evidence-based medicine to support the unequivocal adoption of UGRA as a "standard of care." This article summarizes and critically assesses current data comparing traditional approaches to localizing nerves with those that use ultrasound guidance. In addition, the potential benefits of UGRA that go beyond current information available from comparative studies are explored.

Comparision of nerve stimulator and ultrasonography as the techniques applied for brachial plexus anesthesia

Background

Brachial plexus block is useful for upper extremity surgery, and many techniques are available. The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy of axillary brachial plexus block using an ultrasound technique to the peripheral nerve stimulation technique.

Methods

60 patients scheduled for surgery of the forearm or hand were randomly allocated into two groups (n = 30 per group). For Group 1; US, and for Group 2 PNS was applied. The quality and the onset of the sensorial and motor blockade were assessed. The sensorial blockade, motor blockade time and quality of blockade were compared among the cases.

Results

The time needed to perform the axillary brachial plexus block averaged is similar in both groups (p > 0.05). Although not significant statistically, it was observed that the sensory block had formed earlier in Group 1 (p > 0.05). But the degree of motor blockade was intenser in Group 1 than in Group 2 (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Ultrasound offers a new possibility for identifiying the nerves of the brachial plexus for regional anesthesia. The ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block is a safe method with faster onset time and better quality of motor blockade compared to peripheral nerve stimulation technique.

Recent advance in patient monitoring

Recent advance in technology has developed a lot of new aspects of clinical monitoring. We can monitor sedation levels during anesthesia using various electroencephalographic (EEG) indices, while it is still not useful for anesthesia depth monitoring. Some attempts are made to monitor the changes in sympathetic nerve activity as one of the indicators of stress, pain/analgesia, or anesthesia. To know the balance of sympathetic and parasympathetic activity, heart rate or blood pressure variability is investigated. For trend of cardiac output, low invasive monitors have been investigated. Improvement of ultrasound enables us to see cardiac structure and function continuously and clearer, increases success rate and decreases complication of central venous puncture and various kinds of nerve blocks. Without inserting an arterial catheter, trends of arterial oxygen tension or carbon dioxide tension can be monitored. Indirect visualization of the airway decreases difficult intubation and makes it easier to teach tracheal intubation. The changes in blood volume can be speculated non-invasively. Cerebral perfusion and metabolism are not ordinary monitored yet, but some studies show their usefulness in management of critically ill. This review introduces recent advances in various monitors used in anesthesia and critical care including some studies of the author, especially focused on EEG and cardiac output. However, the most important is that these new monitors are not almighty but should be used adequately in a limited situation where their meaning is confirmed.

Ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block in patient with halo device

Ultrasound guided regional blocks are on the rise, many institutes are training their staff to master this technique of regional anesthesia. Regional anesthesia in case of an emergency surgery or elective surgery can be the best choice. The case described here is an example - patient with a halo fixation device after motor vehicle accident scheduled for surgery of the extremity. The main aim of management of this case is to achieve a safe anesthesia with minimal interference of the cervical fixation. Supraclavicular brachial plexus block is a good choice for surgeries of the arm and hand and use of an ultrasound to guide the block adds to the safety profile of this versatile block. It has been described as "Spinal of the upper limb". Patients with co-morbidities and injuries to the cervical spine are challenging cases to anesthetize, as regional anesthesia is a very attractive option, failure of the regional block will expose the patient to all adverse sequelae, which were being avoided by planning for a regional anesthesia. Ultrasound has revolutionized the way regional anesthesia is practiced and the proper drug can be placed at the right place in the hands of an experienced anesthesiologist and the block will help in avoiding all the complications of endotracheal anesthesia in these cases.

Regional Anaesthesia for Bilateral Upper Limb Surgery: A Review of Challenges and Solutions

Regional anaesthesia for bilateral upper limb surgery can be challenging, yet surgeons are becoming increasingly interested in performing bilateral procedures at the same operation. Anaesthetists have traditionally avoided bilateral brachial plexus block due to concerns about local anaesthetic toxicity, phrenic nerve block and pneumothorax. We discuss these three concerns and review whether advances in ultrasound guidance and nerve catheter techniques should make us reconsider our options. A search of Medline and EMBASE from 1966 to January 2009 was conducted using multiple search terms to identify techniques of providing anaesthesia or analgesia for bilateral upper limb surgery and potential side-effects. Ultrasound imaging and nerve catheter techniques have led to a reduction in dose requirements for effective blocks without side-effects. Effective regional anaesthesia can be performed for bilateral surgery while remaining within recommended safe dose limits. Spacing blocks apart in time can further reduce potential toxicity issues, such that peak absorption rates for each block do not coincide. Since phrenic nerve block remains an issue even with low doses of local anaesthesia, bilateral interscalene blocks are still not recommended. Peripheral nerve blocks have excellent safety profiles and are ideal for ultrasound guidance. Regional anaesthesia can be a suitable option for bilateral upper limb surgery.

Ultrasound guidance for peripheral nerve blockade

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve blocks can be performed using ultrasound guidance. It is not yet clear whether this method of nerve location has benefits over other existing methods.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the use of ultrasound to guide peripheral nerve blockade has any advantages over other methods of peripheral nerve location.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases for relevant published trials: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3); MEDLINE (1966 to July 2008); EMBASE (1974 to July 2008); ISI Web of Science (1945 to 2008 ); CINAHL (1982 to July 2008); and LILACS (1980 to July 2008). We also handsearched meeting supplements.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block with at least one other method of nerve location.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We attempted to contact study authors for additional information, where necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 trials containing data from 1344 patients. Ten trials assessed upper limb blocks and eight assessed lower limb blocks. Most compared ultrasound with peripheral nerve stimulation. All trials were assessed as having a moderate risk of bias due to inability to blind the practitioner. Meta-analysis was not performed because of the variety of blocks, techniques, and outcomes, and the review was based on the authors' assessment of the trials. Ultrasound guidance produced similar success rates in providing surgical anaesthesia (72% to 98.8%) when compared with peripheral nerve stimulation (58% to 93.1%). Major complication rates were low in all studies; however, the use of ultrasound appeared to reduce the incidence of vascular puncture or haematoma formation. Differences in study methodology made it difficult to compare block characteristics, however ultrasound improved quality of sensory block in six studies and motor block in four studies. Block onset time was found to be improved in six out of the 10 studies where this was assessed. Two studies assessed volume of local anaesthetic required and both found a significant reduction was possible when ultrasound was used. Ten studies assessed block performance time and five found a significant reduction with ultrasound, the mean difference in time taken was 1.5 to 4.8 minutes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In experienced hands, ultrasound provides at least as good success rates as other methods of peripheral nerve location. Individual studies have demonstrated that ultrasound may reduce complication rates and improve quality, performance time, and time to onset of blocks. Due to wide variations in study outcomes we chose not to combine the studies in our analysis.

Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia and analgesia: a qualitative systematic review

Ultrasound guidance has become popular for performance of regional anesthesia and analgesia. This systematic review summarizes existing evidence for superior risk to benefit profiles for ultrasound versus other techniques. Medline was systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ultrasound to another technique, and for large (n > 100) prospective case series describing experience with ultrasound-guided blocks. Fourteen RCTs and 2 case series were identified for peripheral nerve blocks. No RCTs or case series were identified for perineural catheters. Six RCTs and 1 case series were identified for epidural anesthesia. Overall, the RCTs and case series reported that use of ultrasound significantly reduced time or number of attempts to perform blocks and in some cases significantly improved the quality of sensory block. The included studies reported high incidence of efficacy of blocks with ultrasound (95%-100%) that was not significantly different than most other techniques. No serious complications were reported in included studies. Current evidence does not suggest that use of ultrasound improves success of regional anesthesia versus most other techniques. However, ultrasound was not inferior for efficacy, did not increase risk, and offers other potential patient-oriented benefits. All RCTs are rather small, thus completion of large RCTs and case series are encouraged to confirm findings.

Upper extremity regional anesthesia: essentials of our current understanding, 2008

Brachial plexus blockade is the cornerstone of the peripheral nerve regional anesthesia practice of most anesthesiologists. As part of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's commitment to providing intensive evidence-based education related to regional anesthesia and analgesia, this article is a complete update of our 2002 comprehensive review of upper extremity anesthesia. The text of the review focuses on (1) pertinent anatomy, (2) approaches to the brachial plexus and techniques that optimize block quality, (4) local anesthetic and adjuvant pharmacology, (5) complications, (6) perioperative issues, and (6) challenges for future research.