Journals / Anestezi Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 1

A Retrospective Analysis of the Analgesic and Adverse Effects of Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block During Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery

Artroskopik Omuz Cerrahisi Sırasında İnterskalen Brakiyal Pleksus Bloğunun Analjezik ve Yan Etkilerinin Retrospektif Analizi

Pages
93–99
Publication Date
2023-11-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: The overall success rate of the blocks was 96.5%, with a mean postoperative analgesia time of 15.5 hours.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Interscalene block (ISB) has become an accepted and effective technique of anesthetic and perioperative analgesia, in arthroscopic shoulder surgery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed consisting 641 patients who had ISB performed between June 2007 – Janu- ary 2013 for success rates, side effects and complications.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: The overall success rate of the blocks was 96.5%, with a mean postoperative analgesia time of 15.5 hours.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Interscalene block (ISB) has become an accepted and effective technique of anesthetic and perioperative analgesia, in arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We aimed to retrospectively eva- luate a series of patients who underwent arthroscopic shoulder surgery under combined ISB and general anesthesia. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed consisting 641 patients who had ISB performed between June 2007 – Janu- ary 2013 for success rates, side effects and complications. Results: The overall success rate of the blocks was 96.5%, with a mean postoperative analgesia time of 15.5 hours. While no pa- tient suffered permanent nerve injury as a result of ISB, the most common complication noted in this analysis was local anestheti- c-related convulsion, which occurred in only one patient. Conclusion: Interscalene block and general anesthesia combinati- on, which provides high patient satisfaction with low side effects and complication profile, can be recommended for patients un- dergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Özet

Amaç: İnterskalen blok (İSB), artroskopik omuz cerrahisinde anes- tezi ve perioperatif analjezi için kabul görmüş ve etkili bir yöntem hâline gelmiştir. Kombine İSB ve genel anestezi altında artroskopik omuz cerrahisi uygulanan bir hasta serisini retrospektif olarak de- ğerlendirmeyi amaçladık. Yöntem: Başarı oranları, yan etkiler ve komplikasyonlar için Hazi- ran 2007 - Ocak 2013 arasında İSB uygulanan 641 hastayı içeren retrospektif bir dosya incelemesi yapıldı. Bulgular: Genel başarılı blok oranı %96,5 ve ortalama postopera- tif analjezi süresi 15,5 saatti. Hiçbir hastada İSB’ye bağlı kalıcı sinir hasarı görülmezken, karşılaşılan en önemli komplikasyon sadece 1 hastada görülen lokal anestezik ilişkili konvülsiyondu. Sonuç: Artroskopik omuz cerrahisi uygulanan hastalarda, düşük yan etki ve komplikasyon profili ile yüksek hasta memnuniyeti sağ- layan ISB ve genel anestezi kombinasyonu önerilebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEZER, T., GÜNGOR, I., EMMEZ, G., KANATLI, U. (2023). A Retrospective Analysis of the Analgesic and Adverse Effects of Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block During Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery. Anestezi Dergisi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 1, 93–99. https://doi.org/10.54875/jarss.2023.71473

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Bruce BG, Green A, Blaine TA, Wesner LV. Brachial plexus blocks for upper extremity orthopaedic surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2012;20(1):38-47
  2. Borgeat A, Blumenthal S. Anaesthesia for shoulder surgery. Current Orthopaedics 2004;18(2):109-17
  3. Peruto CM, Ciccotti MG, Cohen SB. Shoulder arthroscopy positioning: lateral decubitus versus beach chair. Arthroscopy 2009;25(8):891-6
  4. Winnie AP. Interscalene brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg 1970;49(3):455-66
  5. Lenters TR, Davies J, Matsen FA 3rd. The types and severity of complications associated with interscalene brachial plexus block anesthesia: Local and national evidence. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007;16(4):379-87
  6. Bishop JY, Sprague M, Gelber J et al. Interscalene regional anesthesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgery: A safe and effective technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2006;15(5):567- 70
  7. Misamore G, Webb B, McMurray S, Sallay P. A prospec- tive analysis of interscalene brachial plexus blocks per- formed under general anesthesia. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20(2):308-14
  8. Rohrbaugh M, Kentor ML, Orebaugh SL, Williams B. Outcomes of shoulder surgery in the sitting position with interscalene nerve block: A single-center series. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2013;38(1):28-33
  9. D’Alessio JG, Rosenblum M, Shea KP, Freitas DG. A retrospective comparison of interscalene block and general anesthesia for ambulatory surgery shoulder arthroscopy. Reg Anesth 1995;20(1):62-8
  10. Faryniarz D, Morelli C, Coleman S et al. Interscalene block anesthesia at an ambulatory surgery center performing predominantly regional anesthesia: A prospective study of one hundred thirty three patients undergoing shoulder surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2006;15(6):686-90
  11. Bert JM, Khetia E, Dubbink DA. Interscalene block for shoulder surgery in physician-owned community ambulatory surgery centers. Arthroscopy 2010;26(9):1149-52
  12. Tetzlaff JE, Yoon HJ, Brems J. Interscalene brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery. Reg Anesth 1994;19(5):339-43
  13. Moore DD, Maerz T, Anderson K. Shoulders surgeons’ perceptions of interscalene nerve blocks and a review of complications rates in theliterature. Phys Sportsmed 2013;41(3):77-84
  14. Pohl A, Cullen DJ. Cerebral ischemia during shoulder surgery in the upright position: A case series. J Clin Anesth 2005;17(6):463-9
  15. Rains DD, Rooke GA, Wahl CJ. Pathomechanisms and complications related to patient positioning and anesthesia during shoulder arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 2011;27(4):