Ultrasound-Guided Popliteal Sciatic Block with a Single Injection at the Sciatic Division Results in Faster Block Onset than the Classical Nerve Stimulator Technique

Evaluating the impact of ultrasound-guided subsheath versus extrasheath sciatic nerve block on postoperative wound pain in tibial and foot surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate the impact of ultrasound-guided subsheath versus extrasheath sciatic nerve blocks on postoperative wound pain in tibial and foot surgeries, crucial for effective pain management and patient recovery. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, this study used a PICO framework, focusing on patients undergoing tibial and foot surgeries and comparing the efficacy and safety of subsheath and extrasheath sciatic nerve blocks. The literature search spanned four databases without time restrictions, assessing various outcomes like success rate, onset time, duration of analgesia and complication rates. Quality assessment employed the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool, and statistical analyses included heterogeneity assessment, fixed-effect and random-effects models, sensitivity analysis and publication bias evaluation using funnel plots and Egger's linear regression test. From an initial pool of 1213 articles, six met the inclusion criteria. The subsheath group showed a significantly higher success rate of complete sensory blockade within 30 min compared with the extrasheath group (OR = 5.39; 95% CI: 2.82-10.28; p < 0.01). No significant differences were found in procedure duration or incidence of nerve-related complications between the two techniques. The subsheath approach also demonstrated a quicker onset time of sensory blockade (MD = -8.57; 95% CI: -11.27 to -5.88; p < 0.01). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of the results, and no significant publication bias was detected. Ultrasound-guided subsheath sciatic nerve blocks are more effective than extrasheath blocks in achieving rapid and complete sensory blockade for tibial and foot surgeries, with a quicker onset time and comparable safety profile. Subsheath injections are thus recommended as a preferred method for anaesthesia and postoperative pain management in these surgical procedures, enhancing overall patient outcomes.

Ultrasound-Guided Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block: A Minimally Invasive Method for Pain Control During Endovascular Treatment of Critical Limb Ischemia

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block (PSNB) for pain control in endovascular treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 252 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for CLI between January 2020 and August 2022. Of these, 69 patients underwent PSNB, whereas moderate procedural sedation and analgesia was delivered in 183 patients. Pain scores were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) before and during the intervention. Technical and clinical success of PSNB, duration of the procedure, time to onset of nerve block, time for block resolution, and adverse events were recorded. Patient and operator satisfaction were assessed using the Likert scale.

RESULTS

All PSNB procedures were technically and clinically successful, and the mean procedural duration of PSNB was 5.0 minutes ± 0.8 (range, 4-7 minutes). Prolonged effect of PSNB was observed in 3 patients, which resolved within 24 hours. No adverse events were encountered. Median VAS score was significantly lower in the PSNB group than in the moderate procedural sedation and analgesia group during endovascular treatment (0 [range, 0-2] vs 3 [range, 0-7]; P < .001). Patient satisfaction was comparable ("very satisfied" in 66 [95.7%] vs 161 [88.0%]; P = .069). However, operator satisfaction was significantly higher in the PSNB group ("very satisfied" in 69 [100%] vs 161 [88.0%]; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

PSNB is safe and effective for pain control during endovascular treatment of CLI. Low adverse event rates with high patient and operator satisfaction make PSNB a reasonable alternative for high-risk patients.

Techniques and complications of popliteal nerve blocks

BACKGROUND

Use of popliteal nerve blocks (PNBs) as an alternative or adjunctive therapy to traditional methods of pain control (e.g., systemic or spinal anesthesia and opioids) is increasingly popular in foot and ankle surgery.

METHODS

We reviewed online databases for literature on PNBs in foot and ankle surgery to analyze the various techniques and positioning used, the influence of drugs on their efficacy, and possible complications associated with their use. Thirty articles were identified with a predefined search criteria, followed by a review process for relevance.

RESULTS

Patient demographics, procedure specifics, and block techniques, such as anesthetic used, can impact the duration and success of a PNB. Administration with ultrasound guidance proved superior to nerve stimulation, and preoperative administration was superior to postoperative administration.

CONCLUSIONS

PNBs are an effective method to control postoperative pain with minimal complications, leading to decreased analgesic use, earlier discharge, and higher patient satisfaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Comparison of the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided and ultrasound-guided subgluteal nerve blocks with peripheral nerve electrical stimulation: A randomized controlled feasibility trial

AIM: The efficacy of sciatic nerve blockade with subchondral access under ultrasound guidance (USG) versus ultrasound guidance in combination with EPN (USEPN) is unknown. Data on studies of these techniques for blockade of other peripheral nerves are inconsistent. This study evaluated the feasibility of a randomized trial to compare the efficacy of sciatic nerve blockade with USG-guided sciatic access with the current practice of USEPN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty patients were randomized into two groups in which USG or USEPN guidance was used to perform sciatic nerve blockade with sciatic access. The primary endpoint was the quality of the sensory block. The secondary endpoint was the quality of the motor block. RESULTS: Two groups of 20 patients each were analyzed. All patients developed successful motor and sensory blocks of the sciatic nerve when using USG and USEPN. All cases were followed. Three patients were excluded before randomization because of the unsatisfactory ultrasound imaging of the sciatic nerve. CONCLUSION: The results show that a prospective study of alternative techniques of sciatic nerve block by subchondral access is possible. In our pilot study, sciatic nerve block performed under USG guidance without EPN was effective in all cases.

Regional haemodynamic variables and perfusion index in the evaluation of sciatic nerve block: a prospective observational trial

OBJECTIVE

We determined whether regional haemodynamics and perfusion index (PI) could be reliable indicators of a successful sciatic nerve block (SNB).

DESIGN

Prospective observational trial.

SETTING

A tertiary teaching hospital in China from April 2020 to August 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

We assessed 79 patients for eligibility to participate in this study. Nine patients were excluded for not meeting our inclusion criteria, and three patients were excluded due to missing measurements at all time points.

INTERVENTIONS

The patients underwent SNB. Pulsed-wave Doppler and PI measurements were performed.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the diagnostic power of regional haemodynamic change and PI to predict successful SNB. The secondary outcome measure was the effect of SNB on the regional haemodynamics and PI in the lower extremity.

RESULTS

We assessed 79 patients in this study and 67 patients available for the final analysis. The SNB was successful in 59 patients and failed in eight patients. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the patients with successful and failed SNB. Starting from 10 min after SNB, the peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity, time-averaged maximum velocity and time-averaged mean velocity of the anterior tibial artery and posterior tibial artery of patients in the successful SNB group were significantly higher than those in the failed SNB group (p<0.05). The PSV percentage increase at 10 min after SNB has great potential to predict the block success. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values were 0.893 (95% CI 0.7809 to 1.000) and 0.880 (95% CI 0.7901 to 0.9699). The corresponding cut-off values were 19.22 and 35.88, respectively. The PI increased during 5-45 min intervals in patients with successful SNB. The AUC for the PI percentage increases at 10 min after SNB was 0.853 (95% CI 0.7035 to 1.000), with a cut-off value of 93.09.

CONCLUSION

The regional haemodynamic variables, PSV and PI in particular, can be used as alternative indicators for clinicians to evaluate the success of SNB objectively and early.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2000030772.

Color Doppler ultrasonography of an agitated solution is predictive of accurate catheter placement for a continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block

Background

Continuous peripheral nerve catheters (PNCs) have been shown to provide superior postoperative analgesia, decrease opioid consumption, and improve patient satisfaction compared with single injection techniques. In order to achieve success and reliability, accurate catheter positioning is an essential element of PNC placement. An agitated solution of normal saline, D5W, or a local anesthetic solution can be produced by the introduction of air to the injectate, creating air bubbles that can enhance ultrasonographic visualization and possibly improve block success.

Methods

Eighty-three patients were enrolled. Ultrasound-guided continuous popliteal sciatic nerve blocks were performed by positioning the tip of a Tuohy needle between the tibial and common peroneal branches of the sciatic nerve and threading a catheter. An agitated local anesthetic solution was injected through the catheter, viewed with color Doppler ultrasound and video recorded. A peripheral block score (lower score = greater blockade, range 0-14) was calculated based upon the motor and sensory testing at 10, 20, and 30 min after block completion. The color Doppler agitation coverage pattern for the branches of the sciatic nerve was graded as follows: complete (> 50%), partial (> 0%, ≤ 50%), or none (0%).

Results

The degree of nerve blockade at 30 min as judged by median (10th, 90th percentile) peripheral block score was significant for partial or complete color Doppler coverage of the sciatic nerve injectate compared to no coverage [3 (0, 7) vs 8 (4, 14); p < 0.01] and block onset was faster (p = 0.03). The block success was higher in groups with partial or complete coverage of the branches of the sciatic nerve vs no coverage (96% vs 70%; p = 0.02).

Conclusions

Injection of an agitated solution through a popliteal sciatic perineural catheter is predictive of accurate catheter placement when partial or complete coverage of the sciatic nerve branches is visualized with color Doppler ultrasound.

Trial registration

NCT01591603

European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Guidelines on peri-operative use of ultrasound for regional anaesthesia (PERSEUS regional anesthesia): Peripheral nerves blocks and neuraxial anaesthesia

Nowadays, ultrasound-guidance is commonly used in regional anaesthesia (USGRA) and to locate the spinal anatomy in neuraxial analgesia. The aim of this second guideline on the PERi-operative uSE of UltraSound (PERSEUS-RA) is to provide evidence as to which areas of regional anaesthesia the use of ultrasound guidance should be considered a gold standard or beneficial to the patient. The PERSEUS Taskforce members were asked to define relevant outcomes and rank the relative importance of outcomes following the GRADE process. Whenever the literature was not able to provide enough evidence, we decided to use the RAND method with a modified Delphi process. Whenever compared with alternative techniques, the use of USGRA is considered well tolerated and effective for some nerve blocks but there are certain areas, such as truncal blocks, where a lack of robust data precludes useful comparison. The new frontiers for further research are represented by the application of USG during epidural analgesia or spinal anaesthesia as, in these cases, the evidence for the value of the use of ultrasound is limited to the preprocedure identification of the anatomy, providing the operator with a better idea of the depth and angle of the epidural or spinal space. USGRA can be considered an essential part of the curriculum of the anaesthesiologist with a defined training and certification path. Our recommendations will require considerable changes to some training programmes, and it will be necessary for these to be phased in before compliance becomes mandatory.

Lateral popliteal block in foot and ankle surgery: Comparing ultrasound guidance to nerve stimulation. A prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The popliteal block has several benefits in foot and ankle surgery. It reduces postoperative pain, limits the use of narcotics and facilitates early discharge. The aim of this prospective randomized trial was to evaluate whether ultrasound guidance improves block characteristics compared to the nerve stimulation technique in lateral popliteal blocks.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive either a lateral popliteal block using neurostimulation or ultrasound guidance. Block performance time, number of needle pricks, number of redirections were recorded. Pain upon admission to and discharge from post anesthesia care unit (PACU) was recorded. Block duration, patient satisfaction, pain at block site and amount of opioids used in PACU and between subsequent followup visits was recorded. Patients were followed for 12 weeks postoperatively.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of number of pricks, time for the block to wean, pain upon admission to PACU, amount of opioids received in PACU, pain upon discharge from PACU, pain at the operative site, pain at the block site, toe motor function and toe sensation. There was a statistically significant difference in the block procedure performance time between the two groups, with the control group being faster (P<0.0001). A significantly larger number of patients in the control group required more than three needle redirections (P=0.0060).

CONCLUSIONS

The lateral sciatic popliteal block using nerve stimulation had similar block characteristics and patient satisfaction with a significantly faster performance time compared to the ultrasound guided technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, prospective randomized study.

Ultrasound-guided subparaneural popliteal sciatic nerve block: there is more to it than meets the eyes

The popliteal sciatic nerve block is routinely used for anesthesia and analgesia during foot and ankle surgery. This article reviews our current understanding of the anatomy of the sciatic nerve and discusses how fascial tissue layers associated with the nerve may affect block outcomes . The anatomy of the sciatic nerve is more complex than previously described. The tibial and common peroneal nerves within the sciatic nerve trunk appear to be centrally separated by the Compton-Cruveilhier septum and encompassed by their own paraneural sheaths. This unique internal architecture of the sciatic nerve appears to promote proximal spread of local anesthetic to the internal aspect of the sciatic nerve trunk after a subparaneural injection at or below the divergence of the tibial and common peroneal nerves.

Ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block: an effective alternative technique to control ischaemic severe rest pain during endovascular treatment of critical limb ischaemia

Purpose

There are challenges with pain management related to a severely ischaemic limb. Although opioid-based treatment has been the cornerstone of pain relief, the use of these drugs should be limited because of their side effects in such vulnerable patients. We evaluated the utility and efficiency of sciatic nerve block as an alternative method to relieve severe rest pain during endovascular treatment of critical limb ischaemia.

Material and methods

We retrospectively investigated 10 patients who received ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block for the relief of severe rest pain during endovascular treatment of critical limb ischaemia. The degree of pain relief was evaluated by using subjective criteria, from no relief of pain (= 1) to complete relief of pain (= 4). Details of endovascular treatment, time to perform the block, amount of local anaesthetics, duration of the block, need for supplemental analgesia, patient and operator satisfaction, and complications were recorded.

Results

All blocks were technically successful, and all of the patients had complete resolution of the pain within five minutes. The degree of pain relief was 3 in two patients and 4 in eight patients. All patients were satisfied with the block anaesthesia, and no patient required additional analgesia during this period. Operator satisfaction was very good in all cases. Complications secondary to block did not occur in any patient.

Conclusions

Ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block provides effective pain control, which results in excellent patient and operator satisfaction during endovascular treatment of critical limb ischaemia with severe rest pain.

WITHDRAWN: Peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain after major knee surgery

BACKGROUND

Major knee surgery is a common operative procedure to help people with end-stage knee disease or trauma to regain mobility and have improved quality of life. Poorly controlled pain immediately after surgery is still a key issue for this procedure. Peripheral nerve blocks are localized and site-specific analgesic options for major knee surgery. The increasing use of peripheral nerve blocks following major knee surgery requires the synthesis of evidence to evaluate its effectiveness and safety, when compared with systemic, local infiltration, epidural and spinal analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain control following major knee surgery using methods that permit comparison with systemic, local infiltration, epidural and spinal analgesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 1, 2014), MEDLINE and EMBASE, from their inception to February 2014. We identified ongoing studies by searching trial registries, including the metaRegister of controlled trials (mRCT), clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included participant-blind, randomized controlled trials of adult participants (15 years or older) undergoing major knee surgery, in which peripheral nerve blocks were compared to systemic, local infiltration, epidural and spinal analgesia for postoperative pain relief.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data. We recorded information on participants, methods, interventions, outcomes (pain intensity, additional analgesic consumption, adverse events, knee range of motion, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, and participant satisfaction). We used the 5-point Oxford quality and validity scale to assess methodological quality, as well as criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We conducted meta-analysis of two or more studies with sufficient data to investigate the same outcome. We used the I² statistic to explore the heterogeneity. If there was no significant heterogeneity (I² value 0% to 40%), we used a fixed-effect model for meta-analysis, but otherwise we used a random-effects model. For dichotomous data, we present results as a summary risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Where possible, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) or for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH), together with 95% CIs. For continuous data, we used the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for similar outcome measures. We describe the findings of individual studies where pooling of data was not possible.

MAIN RESULTS

According to the eligibility criteria, we include 23 studies with 1571 participants, with high methodological quality overall. The studies compared peripheral nerve blocks adjunctive to systemic analgesia with systemic analgesia alone (19 studies), peripheral nerve blocks with local infiltration (three studies), and peripheral nerve blocks with epidural analgesia (one study). No study compared peripheral nerve blocks with spinal analgesia.Compared with systemic analgesia alone, peripheral nerve blocks adjunctive to systemic analgesia resulted in a significantly lower pain intensity score at rest, using a 100 mm visual analogue scale, at all time periods within 72 hours postoperatively, including the zero to 23 hours interval (MD -11.85, 95% CI -20.45 to -3.25, seven studies, 390 participants), the 24 to 47 hours interval (MD -12.92, 95% CI -19.82 to -6.02, six studies, 320 participants) and the 48 to 72 hours interval (MD -9.72, 95% CI -16.75 to -2.70, four studies, 210 participants). Subgroup analyses suggested that the high levels of statistical variation in our analyses could be explained by larger effects in people undergoing total knee arthroplasty compared with other types of surgery. Pain intensity was also significantly reduced on movement in the 48 to 72 hours interval postoperatively (MD -6.19, 95% CI -11.76 to -0.62, two studies, 112 participants). There was no significant difference on movement between these two groups in the time period of zero to 23 hours (MD -6.95, 95% CI -15.92 to 2.01, five studies, 304 participants) and 24 to 47 hours (MD -8.87, 95% CI -27.77 to 10.03, three studies, 182 participants). The included studies reported diverse types of adverse events, and we did not conduct a meta-analysis on specific types of adverse event. The numbers of studies and participants were also too few to draw conclusions on the other prespecified outcomes of: additional analgesic consumption; median time to remedication; knee range of motion; median time to ambulation; length of hospital stay; hospital costs; and participant satisfaction. There were insufficient data to compare peripheral nerve blocks and local infiltration or between peripheral nerve blocks and epidural analgesia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All of the included studies reported the main outcome of pain intensity but did not cover all the secondary outcomes of interest. The current review provides evidence that the use of peripheral nerve blocks as adjunctive techniques to systemic analgesia reduced pain intensity when compared with systemic analgesia alone after major knee surgery. There were too few data to draw conclusions on other outcomes of interest. More trials are needed to demonstrate a significant difference when compared with local infiltration, epidural analgesia and spinal analgesia.

Extrafasicular and Intraperineural, but No Endoneural, Spread after Deliberate Intraneural Injections in a Cadaveric Study

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Background

There is confusion regarding the spread of intraneurally injected local anesthetic agents during regional anesthesia. The aim of this research was to deliberately inject a marker that does not leave the neural compartment into which it is injected, and then to study the longitudinal and circumferential spread and possible pathways of intraneural spread.

Methods

After institutional review board approval, we intraneurally injected 20 and 5 ml of heparinized blood solution under ultrasound guidance into 12 sciatic nerves in the popliteal fossa and 10 median nerves, respectively, of eight fresh, unembalmed cadavers using standard 22-gauge “D” needles, mimicking the blocks in clinical conditions. Ultrasound evidence of nerve swelling confirmed intraneural injection. Samples of the nerves were then examined under light and scanning electron microscopy.

Results

Extrafascicular spread was observed in all the adipocyte-containing neural compartments of the 664 cross-section samples we examined, but intrafascicular spread was seen in only 6 cross-sections of two nerves. None of the epineurium, perineurium, or neural components were disrupted in any of the samples. Spread between the layers of the perineurium was a route of spread that included the perineurium surrounding the fascicles and the perineurium that formed incomplete septa in the fascicles. Similar to the endoneurium proper, subepineural compartments that did not contain any fat cells did not reveal any spread of heparinized blood solution cells. No “perineural” spaces were observed within the endoneurium. We also did not observe any true intrafascicular spread.

Conclusions

After deliberate intraneural injection, longitudinal and circumferential extrafascicular spread occurred in all instances in the neural compartments that contained adipocytes, but not in the relatively solid endoneurium of the fascicles.

Lower extremity regional anesthesia: essentials of our current understanding

The advent of ultrasound guidance has led to a renewed interest in regional anesthesia of the lower limb. In keeping with the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's ongoing commitment to provide intensive evidence-based education, this article presents a complete update of the 2005 comprehensive review on lower extremity peripheral nerve blocks. The current review article strives to (1) summarize the pertinent anatomy of the lumbar and sacral plexuses, (2) discuss the optimal approaches and techniques for lower limb regional anesthesia, (3) present evidence to guide the selection of pharmacological agents and adjuvants, (4) describe potential complications associated with lower extremity nerve blocks, and (5) identify informational gaps pertaining to outcomes, which warrant further investigation.

Which Ultrasound-Guided Sciatic Nerve Block Strategy Works Faster? Prebifurcation or Separate Tibial-Peroneal Nerve Block? A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve block is an accepted method in lower limb surgeries regarding its convenience and good tolerance by the patients. Quick performance and fast sensory and motor block are highly demanded in this method. The aim of the present study was to compare 2 different methods of sciatic and tibial-peroneal nerve block in lower limb surgeries in terms of block onset.

METHODS

In this clinical trial, 52 candidates for elective lower limb surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups: sciatic nerve block before bifurcation (SG; n = 27) and separate tibial-peroneal nerve block (TPG; n = 25) under ultrasound plus nerve stimulator guidance. The mean duration of block performance, as well as complete sensory and motor block, was recorded and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The mean duration of complete sensory block in the SG and TPG groups was 35.4 ± 4.1 and 24.9 ± 4.2 minutes, respectively, which was significantly lower in the TPG group (P = 0.001). The mean duration of complete motor block in the SG and TPG groups was 63.3 ± 4.4 and 48.4 ± 4.6 minutes, respectively, which was significantly lower in the TPG group (P = 0.001). No nerve injuries, paresthesia, or other possible side effects were reported in patients.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the present study, it seems that TPG shows a faster sensory and motor block than SG.

3D ultrasound estimation of the effective volume for popliteal block at the level of division

Local anaesthetic injection between the tibial and commmon peroneal nerves within connective tissue sheath results in a predictable diffusion and allows for a reduction in the volume needed to achieve a consistent sciatic popliteal block. Using 3D ultrasound volumetric acquisition, we quantified the visible volume in contact with the nerve along a 5cm segment.

METHODS

We included 20 consecutive patients scheduled for bunion surgery. Ultrasound guided popliteal block was performed using a posterior, out of plane approach at the level of división of the sciatic nerve. Thirty ml of mepivacaine 1.5% and levobupivacaine 0.5% were slowly injected while assessing the injection pressure and the diffusion of the local anaesthetic. Volumetric acquisition was performed before and after the block to quantify the the volume of the sciatic nerve and the volume of the surrounding hypoechoic halo contained inside the connective tissue in a 5cm segment.

RESULTS

All blocks were successful within 20min after the injection. The total estimated volume contained inside the common connective tissue sheath was 6.8±2.6cm³. Of this, the volume of the halo sorrounding the nerve was 4.4±1.7cm³ and the volume inside the sciatic nerve was 2.4±1.7cm³.

CONCLUSIONS

The volume of local anaesthetic in close contact with the sciatic nerve can be estimated by volumetric acquisition. Our results suggest that the effective volume of local anaesthetic needed for a successful sciatic popliteal block could be reduced to less than 7ml.

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.

Pathophysiology and Etiology of Nerve Injury Following Peripheral Nerve Blockade

This review synthesizes anatomical, anesthetic, surgical, and patient factors that may contribute to neurologic complications associated with peripheral nerve blockade. Peripheral nerves have anatomical features unique to a given location that may influence risk of injury. Peripheral nerve blockade-related peripheral nerve injury (PNI) is most severe with intrafascicular injection. Surgery and its associated requirements such as positioning and tourniquet have specific risks. Patients with preexisting neuropathy may be at an increased risk of postoperative neurologic dysfunction. Distinguishing potential causes of PNI require clinical assessment and investigation; a definitive diagnosis, however, is not always possible. Fortunately, most postoperative neurologic dysfunction appears to resolve with time, and the incidence of serious long-term nerve injury directly attributable to peripheral nerve blockade is relatively uncommon. Nonetheless, despite the use of ultrasound guidance, the risk of block-related PNI remains unchanged.

WHAT'S NEW

Since the 2008 Practice Advisory, new information has been published, furthering our understanding of the microanatomy of peripheral nerves, mechanisms of peripheral nerve injection injury, toxicity of local anesthetics, the etiology of and monitoring methods, and technologies that may decrease the risk of nerve block-related peripheral nerve injury.

Temporal profile of the effects of regional anesthesia on the cutaneous reflexes of foot muscles

We analyzed the effects of an anesthetic sciatic nerve block on the cutaneomuscular reflex (cMR) and the cutaneous silent period (cSP) of foot muscles, in order to investigate further the type of fibers involved in their generation. In 14 neurologically normal patients with indication for surgical treatment of hallux valgus, we recorded from the extensor digitorum brevis muscle the reflex responses elicited by high-intensity electrical stimulation of the big toe at various time periods, ranging from 0 to 20 min, after ultrasound-guided sciatic nerve popliteal anesthetic block. The first effect was a delay in cSP onset latency, with no changes in end latency. The cMR remained unaltered up to when subjects were no longer able to maintain the contraction. The effects of local anesthetics on peripheral nerves allow for recognition of the different types of fibers contributing to the cMR and the cSP in muscles of the lower limb.

Evidence-based medicine for ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia

Available evidence favoring the use of ultrasound for regional anesthesia is reviewed, updated, and critically assessed. Important outcome advantages include decreased time to block onset; decreased risk of local anesthetic systemic toxicity; and, depending on the outcome definition, increased block success rates. Ultrasound guidance, peripheral nerve blocks, and central neuraxial blocks are discussed.

A randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of ultrasound guidance versus nerve stimulation for lateral popliteal-sciatic nerve blocks in obese patients

OBJECTIVES

Ultrasound guidance may decrease the procedural time for many peripheral nerve blocks compared to nerve stimulation, but these studies have generally excluded obese patients. This single-blinded randomized clinical trial was designed to compare procedural times and related outcomes for ultrasound- versus nerve stimulation-guided lateral popliteal-sciatic nerve blockade specifically in obese patients.

METHODS

With Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent, patients with a body mass index greater than 30 kg/m(2) who were scheduled for foot/ankle surgery and desiring a peripheral nerve block were offered enrollment. Study patients were randomly assigned to receive a lateral popliteal-sciatic nerve block under either ultrasound or nerve stimulation guidance. The patient and assessor were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was procedural time in seconds. Secondary outcomes included number of needle redirections, procedure-related pain, patient satisfaction with the block, success rate, sensory and motor onset times, block duration, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were enrolled and completed the study. All patients had successful nerve blocks. The mean procedural times (SD) were 577 (57) seconds under nerve stimulation and 206 (40) seconds with ultrasound guidance (P< .001; 95% confidence interval for difference, 329-412 seconds). Patients in the ultrasound group had fewer needle redirections and less procedure-related pain, required less opioids, and were more satisfied with their block procedures. There were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that, for obese patients undergoing lateral popliteal-sciatic nerve blocks, ultrasound guidance reduces the procedural time and procedure-related pain and increases patient satisfaction compared to nerve stimulation while providing similar block characteristics.

Ultrasound guided injection inside the common sheath of the sciatic nerve at division level has a higher success rate than an injection outside the sheath

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The recommendations for the level of injection and ideal placement of the needle tip required for successful ultrasound-guided sciatic popliteal block vary among authors. A hypothesis was made that, when the local anesthetic is injected at the division of the sciatic nerve within the common connective tissue sheath, the block has a higher success rate than an injection outside the sheath.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients scheduled for hallux valgus repair surgery were randomized to receive either a sub-sheath block (n=16) or a peri-sheath block (n=18) at the level of the division of the sciatic nerve at the popliteal fossa. For the sub-sheath block, the needle was advanced out of plane until the tip was positioned between the tibial and peroneal nerves, and local anesthetic was then injected without moving the needle. For the peri-sheath block, the needle was advanced out of plane both sides of the sciatic nerve, to surround the sheath. Mepivacaine 1.5% and levobupivacaine 0.5% 30mL were used in both groups. The progression of motor and sensory block was assessed at 5min intervals. Duration of block was recorded.

RESULTS

Adequate surgical block was achieved in all patients in the subsheath group (100%) compared to 12 patients (67%) in the peri-sheath group at 30min. Sensory block was achieved faster in the subsheath than peri-sheath (9.1±7.4min vs. 19.0±4.0; p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that for successful sciatic popliteal block in less than 30min, local anesthetic should be injected within the sheath.

Peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain after major knee surgery

BACKGROUND

Major knee surgery is a common operative procedure to help people with end-stage knee disease or trauma to regain mobility and have improved quality of life. Poorly controlled pain immediately after surgery is still a key issue for this procedure. Peripheral nerve blocks are localized and site-specific analgesic options for major knee surgery. The increasing use of peripheral nerve blocks following major knee surgery requires the synthesis of evidence to evaluate its effectiveness and safety, when compared with systemic, local infiltration, epidural and spinal analgesia.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of peripheral nerve blocks for postoperative pain control following major knee surgery using methods that permit comparison with systemic, local infiltration, epidural and spinal analgesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 1, 2014), MEDLINE and EMBASE, from their inception to February 2014. We identified ongoing studies by searching trial registries, including the metaRegister of controlled trials (mRCT), clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included participant-blind, randomized controlled trials of adult participants (15 years or older) undergoing major knee surgery, in which peripheral nerve blocks were compared to systemic, local infiltration, epidural and spinal analgesia for postoperative pain relief.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data. We recorded information on participants, methods, interventions, outcomes (pain intensity, additional analgesic consumption, adverse events, knee range of motion, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, and participant satisfaction). We used the 5-point Oxford quality and validity scale to assess methodological quality, as well as criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We conducted meta-analysis of two or more studies with sufficient data to investigate the same outcome. We used the I² statistic to explore the heterogeneity. If there was no significant heterogeneity (I² value 0% to 40%), we used a fixed-effect model for meta-analysis, but otherwise we used a random-effects model. For dichotomous data, we present results as a summary risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Where possible, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) or for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH), together with 95% CIs. For continuous data, we used the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for similar outcome measures. We describe the findings of individual studies where pooling of data was not possible.

MAIN RESULTS

According to the eligibility criteria, we include 23 studies with 1571 participants, with high methodological quality overall. The studies compared peripheral nerve blocks adjunctive to systemic analgesia with systemic analgesia alone (19 studies), peripheral nerve blocks with local infiltration (three studies), and peripheral nerve blocks with epidural analgesia (one study). No study compared peripheral nerve blocks with spinal analgesia.Compared with systemic analgesia alone, peripheral nerve blocks adjunctive to systemic analgesia resulted in a significantly lower pain intensity score at rest, using a 100 mm visual analogue scale, at all time periods within 72 hours postoperatively, including the zero to 23 hours interval (MD -11.85, 95% CI -20.45 to -3.25, seven studies, 390 participants), the 24 to 47 hours interval (MD -12.92, 95% CI -19.82 to -6.02, six studies, 320 participants) and the 48 to 72 hours interval (MD -9.72, 95% CI -16.75 to -2.70, four studies, 210 participants). Subgroup analyses suggested that the high levels of statistical variation in our analyses could be explained by larger effects in people undergoing total knee arthroplasty compared with other types of surgery. Pain intensity was also significantly reduced on movement in the 48 to 72 hours interval postoperatively (MD -6.19, 95% CI -11.76 to -0.62, two studies, 112 participants). There was no significant difference on movement between these two groups in the time period of zero to 23 hours (MD -6.95, 95% CI -15.92 to 2.01, five studies, 304 participants) and 24 to 47 hours (MD -8.87, 95% CI -27.77 to 10.03, three studies, 182 participants). The included studies reported diverse types of adverse events, and we did not conduct a meta-analysis on specific types of adverse event. The numbers of studies and participants were also too few to draw conclusions on the other prespecified outcomes of: additional analgesic consumption; median time to remedication; knee range of motion; median time to ambulation; length of hospital stay; hospital costs; and participant satisfaction. There were insufficient data to compare peripheral nerve blocks and local infiltration or between peripheral nerve blocks and epidural analgesia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All of the included studies reported the main outcome of pain intensity but did not cover all the secondary outcomes of interest. The current review provides evidence that the use of peripheral nerve blocks as adjunctive techniques to systemic analgesia reduced pain intensity when compared with systemic analgesia alone after major knee surgery. There were too few data to draw conclusions on other outcomes of interest. More trials are needed to demonstrate a significant difference when compared with local infiltration, epidural analgesia and spinal analgesia.

Electron microscopy of human peripheral nerves of clinical relevance to the practice of nerve blocks. A structural and ultrastructural review based on original experimental and laboratory data

AIM

The goal is to describe the ultrastructure of normal human peripheral nerves, and to highlight key aspects that are relevant to the practice of peripheral nerve block anaesthesia.

METHOD

Using samples of sciatic nerve obtained from patients, and dural sac, nerve root cuff and brachial plexus dissected from fresh human cadavers, an analysis of the structure of peripheral nerve axons and distribution of fascicles and topographic composition of the layers that cover the nerve is presented. Myelinated and unmyelinated axons, fascicles, epineurium, perineurium and endoneurium obtained from patients and fresh cadavers were studied by light microscopy using immunohistochemical techniques, and transmission and scanning electron microscopy. Structure of perineurium and intrafascicular capillaries, and its implications in blood-nerve barrier were revised.

RESULTS

Each of the anatomical elements is analyzed individually with regard to its relevance to clinical practice to regional anaesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine practice of regional anaesthetic techniques and ultrasound identification of nerve structures has led to conceptions, which repercussions may be relevant in future applications of these techniques. In this regard, the ultrastructural and histological perspective accomplished through findings of this study aims at enlightening arising questions within the field of regional anaesthesia.

A comparison of the onset time of complete blockade of the sciatic nerve in the application of ropivacaine and its equal volumes mixture with lidocaine: a double-blind randomized study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the current study is to create a new mixture of local anesthetics-one with a short time of block development and short action term (5 ml of 1% lidocaine solution) and another with a longer time of anesthesia development and a long analgetic effect (5 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine)-for use during surgical operations on extremities. The primary end point was the development of the complete sensory block of the sciatic nerve.

METHODS

Sixty blocks of sciatic nerve were used in a double-blind randomized research, under ultrasonic guidance, using an electric stimulator with the peripheral nerves. Sixty patients were divided into 3 equal groups. In the first group, a sciatic nerve block was performed with 5 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine solution (37.5 mg); in the second group, 10 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine solution (75 mg) was used and, in the third group, a mixture of 5 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine (as above) and 5 ml of 1% lidocaine solution (50 mg) was used. The assessment of the time required for developing sensory and motor blocks was carried out from the beginning of local anesthetic solution injection in the fascial sheath of the sciatic nerve.

RESULTS

Demographic data of patients were identical in the three sample groups. The time required for achieving a complete motor and sensory block was reduced due to the mix of the 1% lidocaine solution with the 0.75% ropivacaine solution. The time required for achieving a complete sensory block in groups treated with 5 and 10 ml ropivacaine was 45 (40-48) and 30 (28-30) min, respectively, in contrast with 12 (10-13) min when the mixture of anesthetics was applied (P < 0.01). There was no difference in analgesic duration in the postoperative period among groups at P > 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

The mixture of 5 ml of 1% lidocaine with 5 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine leads to a reduction in the time required for the development of complete sensory and motor blocks of the sciatic nerve, without reducing postoperative analgesia time.

Starting with ultrasonography decreases popliteal block performance time in inexperienced hands: a prospective randomized study

Background

The widespread of hallux valgus surgery in a day care setting enhanced the role of regional anaesthesia in the last few years. Sciatic nerve block at popliteal fossa has been shown to provide safe and effective analgesia. Our purpose was to compare the success rate and performance time of popliteal block during resident’s training for regional anaesthesia by using nerve stimulation (NS) or combined nerve stimulation and ultrasound (NS + US).

Methods

70 adult patients undergoing hallux valgus surgery were randomly assigned to receive sciatic nerve block at popliteal fossa with US+NS or NS alone with a double injection technique for peroneal and tibial branches, respectively. Two residents experienced with nerve stimulator performed the procedures after a learning phase concerning ultrasonography. A local anaesthetic solution, containing 10 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine and 10 mL of 2% lidocaine was used: 12 mL were infiltrated close the tibial nerve, and 8mL were infiltrated close the common peroneal nerve. Block success rate, sensory block onset time, block performance time were evaluated. Recourse to general anaesthesia was considered as failure.

Results

No differences were detected in success rate and onset time of sensory block between the two groups (P > 0.05). The time to block tibial nerve and the overall block time were significantly faster in US+NS group (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Ultrasound guidance for popliteal nerve block resulted in similar success rate with a faster procedure time when compared with nerve stimulator, thus providing a possible effect on resident education and operating room efficiency.