Does Interscalene Catheter Placement with Stimulating Catheters Improve Postoperative Pain or Functional Outcome After Shoulder Surgery? A Prospective, Randomized and Double-Blinded Trial

Factors correlated with the optimal tension for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using Grasper Tensioning Attachment

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the optimal tension in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). This study aimed to identify preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors that correlate with the tension in ARCR and to determine the optimal intraoperative tension using Grasper Tensioning Attachment, a tension meter attached to the common arthroscopic surgical grasper.

METHODS

This study included 63 patients with a mean age at surgery of 65.3 years (range, 45-83 years) who underwent ARCR. The mean follow-up period was 24.1 months (range, 24-28 months). We investigated the patients' demographic data, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, DeOrio and Cofield classification, and Goutallier stage of the supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles. We also evaluated cuff integrity based on the Sugaya classification via magnetic resonance imaging. The free edge of the torn retracted tendon was grasped, and the passive tension to the footprint was then measured with Grasper Tensioning Attachment with the arm at the side. The anteroposterior (AP) and mediolateral (ML) diameters were also measured.

RESULTS

The preoperative Goutallier stage of the supraspinatus muscle was stage 0 in 7 cases, stage 1 in 34, stage 2 in 20, and stage 3 in 2. The mean intraoperative rotator repair tension was 10.0 ± 2.5 N (range, 7.5-17 N). The mean AP diameter of the rotator cuff tear was 22 ± 10 mm (range, 8-50 mm), and the mean ML diameter was 24 ± 10 mm (range, 10-50 mm). Age, DeOrio and Cofield classification, Goutallier stage, AP diameter, and ML diameter correlated with rotator repair tension. The rotator repair tension in Sugaya classification type III or IV cases (n = 12, 11.4 ± 2.4 N) was significantly larger than that in type I or II cases (n = 51, 9.7 ± 2.4 N; P = .03). Tension ≥ 10 N as a cutoff value from receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was a risk factor for poor cuff integrity (95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Rotator repair tension ≥ 10 N was a risk factor for poor cuff integrity. Thus, care should be taken when performing intraoperative procedures and administering postoperative regimens.

A comparison of continuous interscalene block versus general anesthesia alone on the functional outcomes of the patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

PURPOSE

The aim of this prospective and randomized study was to compare the effects of general anesthesia to the combination of general anesthesia and continuous interscalene block on postoperative pain and functional outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

METHODS

This study included a total of 85 patients aged 45-74 years, who were scheduled for elective arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. One group consists of patients who underwent only general anesthesia (GA, N = 43), and the other group consists of patients who underwent a combination of continuous interscalene brachial plexus block and general anesthesia (CISB + GA, N = 42). Pain levels of the patients were evaluated postoperatively by a visual analog scale. Shoulder function was evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively using the Constant score.

RESULTS

Patients in the CISB + GA group had lower postoperative visual analog scores and less additional analgesic needs during the early postoperative period than those in the GA group. Constant scores of the patients in the CISB + GA group at postoperative week 6 were higher than those in the GA group. Evaluation of the functional outcomes at 6 months postoperatively showed that there were no significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Although CISB significantly improved postoperative pain control and early (in the first 6 weeks) functional outcomes following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, there was no significant difference between the CISB group and CISB + GA group at 6 months.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, Randomized Controlled Trial, Treatment Study.

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.].

No correlation between minimal electrical charge at the tip of the stimulating catheter and the efficacy of the peripheral nerve block catheter for brachial plexus block: a prospective blinded cohort study

Background

Stimulating catheters offer the possibility of delivering an electrical charge via the tip of the catheter. This may be advantageous as it allows verifying if the catheter tip is in close proximity to the target nerve, thereby increasing catheter performance. This prospective blinded cohort study was designed to investigate whether there is a correlation between the minimal electrical charge at the tip of the stimulating catheter, and the efficacy of the peripheral nerve block (PNB) catheter as determined by 24 h postoperative morphine consumption.

Methods

Forty adult patients with ASA physical health classification I-III scheduled for upper extremity surgery under combined continuous interscalene block and general anesthesia were studied. Six patients were excluded from analysis.

After inserting a stimulating catheter as if it were a non-stimulating catheter for 2–5 cm through the needle, the minimal electrical charge necessary to obtain an appropriate motor response was determined. A loading dose of 20 mL ropivacaine 0.75% ropivacaine was then administered, and postoperative analgesia was provided by a continuous infusion of ropivacaine 0.2% 8 mL.h^-1 via the brachial plexus catheter, and an intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device.

Main outcome measures include the minimal electrical charge (MEC) at the tip of the stimulating catheter necessary to elicit an appropriate motor response, and the efficacy of the PNB catheter as determined by 24 h postoperative PCA morphine consumption.

Results

Mean (SD) [range] MEC at the tip of the stimulating catheter was 589 (1414) [30 – 5000] nC. Mean (SD) [range] 24 h morphine consumption was 8.9 (9.9) [0–29] mg. The correlation between the MEC and 24 h postoperative morphine consumption was Spearman’s Rho r_s = -0.26, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.09.

Conclusion

We conclude that there is no proportional relation between MEC at the tip of the blindly inserted stimulating catheter and 24 h postoperative morphine consumption.

Trial registration

Trialregister.nl identifier: NTR2328

The role of continuous peripheral nerve blocks

A continuous peripheral nerve block (cPNB) is provided in the hospital and ambulatory setting. The most common use of CPNBs is in the peri- and postoperative period but different indications have been described like the treatment of chronic pain such as cancer-induced pain, complex regional pain syndrome or phantom limb pain. The documented benefits strongly depend on the analgesia quality and include decreasing baseline/dynamic pain, reducing additional analgesic requirements, decrease of postoperative joint inflammation and inflammatory markers, sleep disturbances and opioid-related side effects, increase of patient satisfaction and ambulation/functioning improvement, an accelerated resumption of passive joint range-of-motion, reducing time until discharge readiness, decrease in blood loss/blood transfusions, potential reduction of the incidence of postsurgical chronic pain and reduction of costs. Evidence deriving from randomized controlled trials suggests that in some situations there are also prolonged benefits of regional anesthesia after catheter removal in addition to the immediate postoperative effects. Unfortunately, there are only few data demonstrating benefits after catheter removal and the evidence of medium- or long-term improvements in health-related quality of life measures is still lacking. This review will give an overview of the advantages and adverse effects of cPNBs.

Continuous femoral versus posterior lumbar plexus nerve blocks for analgesia after hip arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled study

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroplasty frequently requires potent postoperative analgesia, often provided with an epidural or posterior lumbar plexus local anesthetic infusion. However, American Society of Regional Anesthesia guidelines now recommend against epidural and continuous posterior lumbar plexus blocks during administration of various perioperative anticoagulants often administered after hip arthroplasty. A continuous femoral nerve block is a possible analgesic alternative, but whether it provides comparable analgesia to a continuous posterior lumbar plexus block after hip arthroplasty remains unclear. We therefore tested the hypothesis that differing the catheter insertion site (femoral versus posterior lumbar plexus) after hip arthroplasty has no impact on postoperative analgesia.

METHODS

Preoperatively, subjects undergoing hip arthroplasty were randomly assigned to receive either a femoral or a posterior lumbar plexus stimulating catheter inserted 5 to 15 cm or 0 to 1 cm past the needle tip, respectively. Postoperatively, patients received perineural ropivacaine, 0.2% (basal 6 mL/hr, bolus 4 mL, 30-minute lockout) for at least 2 days. The primary end point was the average daily pain scores as measured with a numeric rating scale (0-10) recorded in the 24-hour period beginning at 07:30 the morning after surgery, excluding twice-daily physical therapy sessions. Secondary end points included pain during physical therapy, ambulatory distance, and supplemental analgesic requirements during the same 24-hour period, as well as satisfaction with analgesia during hospitalization.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) pain scores for subjects receiving a femoral infusion (n = 25) were 3.6 (1.8) versus 3.5 (1.8) for patients receiving a posterior lumbar plexus infusion (n = 22), resulting in a group difference of 0.1 (95% confidence interval -0.9 to 1.2; P = 0.78). Because the confidence interval was within a prespecified -1.6 to 1.6 range, we conclude that the effect of the 2 analgesic techniques on postoperative pain was equivalent. Similarly, we detected no differences between the 2 treatments with respect to the secondary end points, with one exception: subjects with a femoral catheter ambulated a median (10th-90th percentiles) 2 (0-17) m the morning after surgery, in comparison with 11 (0-31) m for subjects with a posterior lumbar plexus catheter (data nonparametric; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

After hip arthroplasty, a continuous femoral nerve block is an acceptable analgesic alternative to a continuous posterior lumbar plexus block when using a stimulating perineural catheter. However, early ambulatory ability suffers with a femoral infusion.

The effect of stimulating versus nonstimulating catheter techniques for continuous regional anesthesia: a semiquantitative systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Stimulating catheters provide feedback regarding the location of the catheter tip in relation to the target nerve or plexus. There is debate concerning whether stimulating catheters may reduce the failure rate of postoperative analgesia or whether they may enhance functional recovery by providing superior and more reliable postoperative analgesia.

METHODS

Studies comparing the effect of stimulating versus nonstimulating catheters for postoperative analgesia were systematically and independently searched by 2 authors.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled studies could be included in this review. One trial was performed in volunteers; the others were clinical trials in patients. Five trials were performed in patients scheduled for a femoral nerve catheter, 4 for a distal sciatic nerve catheter, 1 in patients receiving an interscalene nerve catheter, and 1 in patients with an infraclavicular brachial plexus block. A standard quantitative analysis was deemed inappropriate because of considerable heterogeneity regarding the investigated outcome parameters. A semiquantitative review revealed that efficacy (judged by reduction in the need for rescue analgesics, complete surgery block, or median effective local anesthetic volume blocking the nerve) suggests improvement in stimulating catheters compared with nonstimulating catheters. Patient satisfaction as well as functional recovery was poorly investigated, so no conclusions could be drawn.

CONCLUSIONS

Published reports of randomized controlled trials provide evidence for a better analgesic effect from stimulating catheters. Future trials should be conducted in a standardized manner with uniform reporting of outcomes, which may facilitate future quantitative analysis.

Comparative efficacy of ultrasound-guided and stimulating popliteal-sciatic perineural catheters for postoperative analgesia

PURPOSE

Perineural catheter insertion using ultrasound guidance alone is a relatively new approach. Previous studies have shown that ultrasound-guided catheters take less time to place with high placement success rates, but the analgesic efficacy compared with the established stimulating catheter technique remains unknown. We tested the hypothesis that popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter insertion relying exclusively on ultrasound guidance results in superior postoperative analgesia compared with stimulating catheters.

METHODS

Preoperatively, subjects receiving a popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter for foot or ankle surgery were assigned randomly to either ultrasound guidance (bolus via needle with non-stimulating catheter insertion) or electrical stimulation (bolus via catheter). We used 1.5% mepivacaine 40 mL for the primary surgical nerve block and 0.2% ropivacaine (basal 8 mL·hr(-1); bolus 4 mL; 30 min lockout) was infused postoperatively. The primary outcome was average surgical pain on postoperative day one.

RESULTS

Forty of the 80 subjects enrolled were randomized to each treatment group. One of 40 subjects (2.5%) in the ultrasound group failed catheter placement per protocol vs nine of 40 (22.5%) in the stimulating catheter group (P = 0.014). The difference in procedural duration (mean [95% confidence interval (CI)]) was -6.48 (-9.90 - -3.05) min, with ultrasound requiring 7.0 (4.0-14.1) min vs stimulation requiring 11.0 (5.0-30.0) min (P < 0.001). The average pain scores of subjects who provided data on postoperative day one were somewhat higher for the 33 ultrasound subjects than for the 26 stimulation subjects (5.0 [1.0-7.8] vs 3.0 [0.0-6.5], respectively; P = 0.032), a difference (mean [95%CI]) of 1.37 (0.03-2.71).

CONCLUSION

For popliteal-sciatic perineural catheters, ultrasound guidance takes less time and results in fewer placement failures compared with stimulating catheters. However, analgesia may be mildly improved with successfully placed stimulating catheters. Clinical trial registration number NCT00876681.

A trainee-based randomized comparison of stimulating interscalene perineural catheters with a new technique using ultrasound guidance alone

OBJECTIVE

Compared to the well-established stimulating catheter technique, the use of ultrasound guidance alone for interscalene perineural catheter insertion is a recent development and has not yet been examined in a randomized fashion. We hypothesized that an ultrasound-guided technique would require less time and produce equivalent results compared to electrical stimulation (ES) when trainees attempt interscalene perineural catheter placement.

METHODS

Preoperatively, patients receiving an interscalene perineural catheter for shoulder surgery were randomly assigned to an insertion protocol using either ultrasound guidance with a nonstimulating catheter or ES with a stimulating catheter. The primary outcome was the procedural duration (in minutes), starting when the ultrasound probe (ultrasound group) or catheter insertion needle (ES group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter insertion needle was removed after catheter insertion.

RESULTS

All ultrasound-guided catheters (n = 20) were placed successfully and resulted in surgical anesthesia versus 85% of ES-guided catheters (n = 20; P = .231). Perineural catheters placed by ultrasound (n = 20) took a median (10th-90th percentiles) of 8.0 (5.0-15.5) minutes compared to 14.0 (5.0-30.0) minutes for ES (n = 20; P = .022). All catheters placed according to the protocol in both treatment groups resulted in a successful nerve block; however, 1 patient in the ES group had local anesthetic spread to the epidural space. There was 1 vascular puncture using ultrasound guidance compared to 5 in the ES-guided catheter group (P = .182).

CONCLUSIONS

Trainees using a new ultrasound-guided technique can place inter-scalene perineural catheters in less time compared to a well-documented technique using ES with a stimulating catheter and can produce equivalent results.

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus block via an ultrasound-guided posterior approach: a randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

The posterior approach for placing continuous interscalene catheters has not been studied in a controlled investigation. In this randomized, triple-masked, placebo-controlled study, we tested the hypothesis that an ultrasound-guided continuous posterior interscalene block provides superior postoperative analgesia compared to a single-injection ropivacaine interscalene block after moderately painful shoulder surgery.

METHODS

Preoperatively, subjects received a stimulating interscalene catheter using an ultrasound-guided, in-plane posterior approach. All subjects received an initial bolus of ropivacaine. Postoperatively, subjects were discharged with oral analgesics and a portable infusion device containing either ropivacaine 0.2% or normal saline programmed to deliver a perineural infusion over 2 days. The primary outcome was average pain on postoperative day (POD) 1 (scale: 0-10). Secondary outcomes included least and worst pain scores, oral opioid requirements, sleep disturbances, patient satisfaction, and incidence of complications.

RESULTS

Of the 32 subjects enrolled, 30 perineural catheters were placed per protocol. Continuous ropivacaine perineural infusion (n = 15) produced a statistically and clinically significant reduction in average pain (median [10th-90th percentile]) on POD 1 compared with saline infusion (n = 15) after initial ropivacaine bolus (0.0 [0.0-5.0] versus 3.0 [0.0-6.0], respectively; P < 0.001). Median oral opioid consumption (oxycodone) was lower in the ropivacaine group than in the placebo group on POD 1 (P = 0.002) and POD 2 (P = 0.002). Subjects who received a ropivacaine infusion suffered fewer sleep disturbances than those in the placebo group (P = 0.005 on POD 0 and 1 nights) and rated their satisfaction with analgesia higher than subjects who received normal saline (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to a single-injection interscalene block, a 2-day continuous posterior interscalene block provides greater pain relief, minimizes supplemental opioid requirements, greatly improves sleep quality, and increases patient satisfaction after moderate-to-severe painful outpatient shoulder surgery.

Ultrasound assisted parascalene brachial plexus block for performing arthroscopic shoulder surgery: report on 8 cases: A case report

Performing a brachial plexus block is very useful for shoulder arthroscopic surgery. Several techniques for blocking the brachial plexus have been described with the purpose of improving the efficacy and minimizing the risk. The parascalene approach was introduced in 1979. This block approaches at the lateral border of the anterior scalene muscle and superior to the clavicle. At this level, the incidences of phrenic nerve paralysis and spinal or epidural anesthesia should be minimized. Previous studies have reported on ultrasound-assisted brachial plexus blocks, but few studies have applied this imaging technology to the parascalene region. We report here on 8 cases of parascalene brachial plexus block with using ultrasound guidance to show the clinical usefulness of this technology for conducting arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Ultrasound technology is valuable to anesthesiologists to localize nerves and the needle placement during the parascalene approach to block the brachial plexus for conducting arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Interscalene perineural catheter placement using an ultrasound-guided posterior approach

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The posterior approach to the brachial plexus--or cervical paravertebral block--has advantages over the anterolateral interscalene approach, but concerns regarding "blind" needle placement near the neuraxis have limited the acceptance of this useful technique. We present a technique to place an interscalene perineural catheter that potentially decreases neuraxial involvement with the use of ultrasound guidance.

METHODS

A 55-year-old man scheduled for total shoulder arthroplasty underwent placement of an interscalene perineural catheter. The posterior approach was selected to avoid the external jugular vein and anticipated sterile surgical field. Under in-plane ultrasound guidance, a 17-gauge insulated Tuohy-tip needle was inserted between the levator scapulae and trapezius muscles, and guided through the middle scalene muscle, remaining less than 2 cm below the skin throughout. Deltoid and biceps contractions were elicited at a current of 0.6 mA, and a 19-gauge stimulating catheter was advanced 5 cm beyond the needle tip, without a concomitant decrease in motor response.

RESULTS

The initial 40 mL 0.5% ropivacaine bolus via the catheter resulted in unilateral anesthesia typical of an interscalene block; and subsequent perineural infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine was delivered via portable infusion pump through postoperative day 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous interscalene block using an ultrasound-guided posterior approach is an alternative technique that retains the benefits of posterior catheter insertion, but potentially reduces the risk of complications that may result from blind needle insertion.