The effect of stimulating versus nonstimulating catheters for continuous interscalene plexus blocks in short-term pain management

被引:16
作者
Birnbaum, Juergen
Kip, Miriam
Spies, Claudia D.
Hein, Ortrud Vargas
Labs, Karsten
Moeckel, Gregor
Volk, Thomas
机构
[1] Univ Med Berlin, Charite, Dept Anesthesia & Intens Care Med, D-10117 Berlin, Germany
[2] Ctr Musculoskeletal Surg, D-10117 Berlin, Germany
[3] Asklepios Klin Birkenwerder, Dept Orthopaed, D-16547 Birkenwerder, Germany
关键词
catheter technique; interscalene brachial plexus block; postoperative analgesia; ropivacame plasma concentrations; stimulating catheter;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinane.2007.03.006
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Study Objective: To investigate whether placement, and use of stimulating catheters for interscalene brachial plexus blocks improves short-term postoperative analgesia. Design: Controlled, prospective, randomized, pilot study. Setting: University hospital. Patients: 60 patients undergoing shoulder surgery. Interventions and Main Measurements: The brachial plexus was identified using a stimulating needle. In conventional catheter group 1 (CC 1), local anesthetic (LA) was injected through the needle and catheters were advanced blindly thereafter. In catheter group 2 (CC 2), catheters were blindly inserted and LA was injected through the catheter. In the stimulating catheter group (SQ, LA was injected only after catheter tip location was confirmed by nerve stimulation. Time required to perform the block, pain intensity at rest, and dynamic pain (defined movement: lifting of arm; numeric rating scale, 0-10), patient satisfaction (verbal rating scale, Likert scale), and plasma concentrations of ropivacame were measured. Main Results: Patients in the SC group had significantly decreased pain scores. The median block performance time was 6 minutes in CC 1 (CI 25%-75%: 4-8 min), 11 minutes in CC 2 (CI 25%-75%: 7-13 min), and 12 minutes in SC (CI 25%-75%: 10-24 min). Patient satisfaction and plasma concentrations of ropivacame did not differ among the groups. Conclusions: Stimulating catheters for interscalene plexus blocks improve postoperative analgesia at rest in patients undergoing shoulder surgery. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:434 / 439
页数:6
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
ADAMS H A, 1989, Regional-Anaesthesie, V12, P53
[2]   Analgesic effect of interscalene block using low-dose bupivacaine for outpatient arthroscopic shoulder surgery [J].
Al-Kaisy, A ;
McGuire, G ;
Chan, VWS ;
Bruin, G ;
Peng, P ;
Miniaci, A ;
Perlas, A .
REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 1998, 23 (05) :469-473
[3]   Comparative study of methods of measuring acute pain intensity in an ED [J].
Berthier, F ;
Potel, G ;
Leconte, P ;
Touze, MD ;
Baron, D .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1998, 16 (02) :132-136
[4]   A new technique of continuous interscalene nerve block [J].
Boezaart, AP ;
de Beer, JF ;
du Toit, C ;
van Rooyen, K .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 1999, 46 (03) :275-281
[5]   Evaluation of the lateral modified approach for continuous interscalene block after shoulder surgery [J].
Borgeat, A ;
Dullenkopf, A ;
Ekatodramis, G ;
Nagy, L .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2003, 99 (02) :436-442
[6]   Interscalene brachial plexus anesthesia with ropivacaine 5 mg/mL and bupivacaine 5 mg/mL: Effects on electrocardiogram [J].
Borgeat, A ;
Ekatodramis, G ;
Blumenthal, S .
REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2004, 29 (06) :557-563
[7]  
Borgeat A, 2001, ANESTH ANALG, V92, P218
[8]   Patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine after major shoulder surgery: PCIA vs PCA [J].
Borgeat, A ;
Tewes, E ;
Biasca, N ;
Gerber, C .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 1998, 81 (04) :603-605
[9]  
BRUNNER E, 1999, NICHT PARAMETRISHE A
[10]   Using stimulating catheters for continuous sciatic nerve block shortens onset time of surgical block and minimizes postoperative consumption of pain medication after halux valgus repair as compared with conventional nonstimulating catheters [J].
Casati, A ;
Fanelli, G ;
Koscielniak-Nielsen, Z ;
Cappelleri, G ;
Aldegheri, G ;
Danelli, G ;
Fuzier, R ;
Singelyn, F .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2005, 101 (04) :1192-1197