Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Hand Procedures

The Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Between General and Topical Anesthesia on Micro-Plasma Radiofrequency Treatment for Hypertrophic Scar: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

While micro-plasma radiofrequency (MPR) treatment has a significant impact on hypertrophic scars, patients often require anesthesia to alleviate substantial discomfort. Currently, patients with similar degrees of scarring may choose surface anesthesia or general anesthesia based on their personal preferences. Nevertheless, the effectiveness and safety of different anesthesia modalities remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of both general and surface anesthesia in MPR treatment for hypertrophic scars.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 101 patients diagnosed with hypertrophic scars who underwent MPR with different anesthesia methods. The primary measures of efficacy included the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores assessed before the first treatment and six months after the final treatment. Pain relief was evaluated using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Safety was assessed by comparing the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients in the general anesthesia group showed a significant difference in scar pigmentation 6 months after the treatment and lower pain level than those in the surface anesthesia group in the treatment of MPR. The difference in safety was not statistically significant. After adjusting for confounding factors and propensity score matching, the outcome of VSS and VAS scores was stable.

CONCLUSION

General anesthesia, as opposed to surface anesthesia, appears to enhance both the effectiveness and safety of MPR while reducing postoperative pain in the treatment of hypertrophic scars. For patients with heightened pain sensitivity, general anesthesia may be the preferred treatment option.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors http://www.springer.com/00266 .

Management of hand fractures

Hand fractures are the most common fractures of the upper extremity, with a reported incidence of 3.7 per 1000 per year for men and 1.3 per 1000 per year for women. Understanding the diagnosis and management of these injuries is vital for any clinician working in the emergency department, plastic or orthopaedic surgery or providing community care. This review identifies the most common presentations and outlines how to assess and manage such fractures appropriately, with an emphasis on clinical and radiographic examination. The majority of hand fractures are managed conservatively and operative management should be carefully considered on a case-by-case basis with analysis of patient and fracture-related factors, in order to achieve optimal hand function following treatment.

[Distal hand block]

OBJECTIVE

Peripheral nerve blocks in hand surgery.

INDICATIONS

Short operations on the hand.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Long operations, polyneuropathy, local anesthesia allergy.

TECHNIQUE

Identification of landmarks, skin disinfection, local anesthesia injection, surgery.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Postoperative monitoring.

RESULTS

We performed 75 hand surgeries using distal nerve blocks over 3 years (between 2015 and 2018) in our department. In all, 60% (n = 45) of cases belong to the innervation region of the median nerve, 28% of cases (n = 21) belong to the innervation area of the radial nerve and about 5% (n = 4) to the innervation area of the ulnar nerve. In 7% (n = 5) of cases, anesthesia of two neighboring innervation areas was necessary. The distal nerve block provides a reliable form of anesthesia in hand surgery with low complication rates.