Journals / Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation / 2017 / Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 5

Comparison Between the Two-Injection Technique and the Four-Injection Technique in Axillary Brachial Plexus Block with Articaine

Artikain Yapılan Brakial Pleksus Bloklarında İkili veya Dörtlü Enjeksiyon Tekniklerinin Karşılaştırılması

Pages
289–296
DOI
—
🏛️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)

The two-injection method can also be used in specific surgery such as for carpal tunnel syndrome, as an alternative to multi-injection method.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: In this study, we aimed to compare axillary brachial plexus block using the two-injection and four-injection techniques assisted with ultrasonography (USG) and nerve stimulator in patients operated for carpal tunnel syndrome with articaine.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To evaluate which technique is more effective, we compared the onset time, effectiveness, and duration of block procedures, patient satisfaction, adverse effect of the drug, and complication rates of the motor and sensory blocks.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The two-injection method can also be used in specific surgery such as for carpal tunnel syndrome, as an alternative to multi-injection method.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: In this study, we aimed to compare axillary brachial plexus block using the two-injection and four-injection techniques assisted with ultrasonography (USG) and nerve stimulator in patients operated for carpal tunnel syndrome with articaine. To evaluate which technique is more effective, we compared the onset time, effectiveness, and duration of block procedures, patient satisfaction, adverse effect of the drug, and complication rates of the motor and sensory blocks. Methods: Sixty patients were randomly divided into two groups. A mixture of physiologic serum added to articain with NaHCO3 (30 mL) was injected into the patients’ axilla in both the groups. After the blockage of the musculocutaneous nerve in both the groups, the median nerve in the two-injection group and the median nerve, ulnar nerve, and radial nerve in the four-injection group were blocked. In brachial plexus nerves, sensorial blockage was evaluated with pinprick test, and motor block was evaluated by contraction of the muscles innervated by each nerve. The adverse effects and complications, visual analog scale (VAS) values during the operation, and post-operative patient satisfaction were recorded. Results: Sufficient analgesia and anaesthesia were achieved with no need for an additional local anaesthetics in both the groups. Furthermore, additional sedation requirements were found to be similar in both the groups. A faster rate and a more effective complete block were achieved in more patients from the four-injection group. In the two-injection group, the block could not be achieved for N. radialis in one patient. All other nerves were successfully blocked. Whereas the blockage procedure lasted longer in the four-injection group, the VAS values recorded during the blockage procedure were higher in the four-injection group. No statistical difference was found with regard to patient satisfaction, and no adverse effects and complications were observed in any group. Conclusion: Although the multi-injection method takes more time, it provides faster anaesthesia and more complete blockage than the two-injection method used with articain. The two-injection method can also be used in specific surgery such as for carpal tunnel syndrome, as an alternative to multi-injection method.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada ultrason ve sinir stimulatörü eşliğinde karpal tünel sendromu cerrahisi geçiren hastalarda, artikain ile yapılan ak- siler brakial pleksus bloğunda ikili ve dörtlü enjeksiyon teknikleri karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Hangi tekniğin daha etkili olduğu- nu değerlendirebilmek için; blok etkisinin başlangıç zamanı, etkin- liği, blok süresi, hasta memnuniyeti, ilacın yan etkisi ve motor ve duyu bloğunun komplikasyon oranları karşılaştırıldı. Yöntemler: Altmış hasta randomize olarak iki gruba ayrıldı. Ar- tikain, sodyum bikarbonat ve serum fizyolojik karışımı 30 mL'ye tamamlanarak her iki gruba uygulandı. Her iki grupta muskülo- kütan sinir blokajı sonrası, ikili enjeksiyon grubuna median sinir blokajı, dörtlü enjeksiyon grubuna median, ulnar ve radial sinir blokajı uygulandı. Brakial pleksus sinirlerinde duyusal blok pinp- rik testi ile ve motor blok ise kasların kontrksiyonunun degerlen- dirilmesi ile belirlendi. Yan etkiler ve komplikasyonlar ameliyat süresince vizüel analog skala (VAS), postoperatif dönemde hasta memnuniyeti kayıt altına alındı. Bulgular: Her iki grupta ek lokal anestezi ihtiyacı olmadan yeterli anestezi ve analjezi sağlandı. Bununla beraber ek sedatif ihtiyacı her iki grupta benzer bulunurken, dörtlü enjeksiyon grubunda daha fazla sayıda hastada daha hızlı ve daha etkin bir tam blok olduğu gözlendi. İkili enjeksiyon grubunda bir hastada nervus radialste blok sağlanamadı. Bunun dışındaki bütün sinirlerde blok başarı ile sağlandı. Dörtlü enjeksiyon grubunda blok prosedürü süresi daha uzun iken, bu prosedür esnasında gözlenen vizüel analog skala skorlarının dörtlü enjeksiyon grubunda daha yüksek olduğu görül- dü. Her iki grupta da hasta memnuniyeti açısından istatistiksel bir farklılık gözlenmezken, herhangi bir ilaç yan etkisi ve komplikas- yonu iki grupta da görülmedi. Sonuç: Artikain ile çoklu enjeksiyon yöntemi daha fazla süre alan bir prosedür olmasına rağmen, dörtlü enjeksiyon tekniği ikili en- jeksiyona göre daha hızlı bir anestezi ve daha fazla sayıda tam blo- kaj sağlamaktadır. İkili enjeksiyon yöntemi aynı zamanda karpal tünel gibi spesifik cerrahilerde multi enjeksiyon yöntemine alterna- tif olarak kullanılabilir

🔖

Cite This Article

ERTİKİN, A., ARGUN, G., MISIRLIOĞLU, M., AYDIN, M., ARIKAN, M., KADIOĞULLARI, N. (2017). Comparison Between the Two-Injection Technique and the Four-Injection Technique in Axillary Brachial Plexus Block with Articaine. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 5, 289–296. https://ajindex.com/articles/370245

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Lennon RL, Linstromberg JW. Brachial plexus anesthesia and axillary sheath elastance. Anesth Analg 1983; 62: 215-7
  2. Coventry DM, Barker KF, Thomson M. Comparison of two neurostimulation techniques for axillary brachial plexus blockade. Br J Anaesth 2001; 86: 80-3. [CrossRef] 3. Marhofer P, Willschke H, Greher M, Kapral S. New perspectives in regional anesthesia: the use of ultrasound – past, present, and future. Can J Anesth 2005; 52: 1-5. [CrossRef] 4. van Oss GE, Vree TB, Baars AM, Termond EF, Booij LH. Pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and renal excretion of articaine and its metabolite articainic acid in patients after epidural administration. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1989; 6: 49-56
  3. Moller RA, Covino BG. Cardiac electrophysiologic effects of articain compared with bupivacaine and lidocaine. Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 1266-73. [CrossRef] 6. Muschaweck R, Rippel R. Ein neues lokal anaesthetikum (carticain) aus der thiophenreiche. Parkt Anaesth 1974; 9: 135-46
  4. Simon MA, Vree TB, Gielen MJ, Booij LH, Lagerwerf AJ, et al. Similar motor block effects with different disposition kinetics between lidocaine and articaine in patients undergoing axillary brachial plexus block during day case surgery. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 1999; 37: 598-607
  5. Muschaweck R, Rippel R. Ein neues lokal anaesthetikum (carticain) aus der thiophenreiche. Parkt Anaesth 1974; 9: 135-46
  6. Hadzic A, Arliss J, Kerimoglu B. A comparison of infraclavicular nerve block versus general anesthesia for hand and wrist day case surgeries. Anesthesiology 2004; 101: 127-32. [CrossRef] 10. Vester-Andersen T, Husum B, Lindeburg T, Borrits L, Gothgen I. Perivascular axillary block IV: blockade following 40, 50, or 60 ml mepivacaine 1 % with adrenaline. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1984; 28: 99-105. [CrossRef] 11. Baranowski AP, Pither CE. A comparison of three methods of axillary brachial plexus anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1990; 45: 362-5
  7. Chan VW, Perlas A, Mmlartney CJ, Brull R, Xu D, Abbas S. Ultrasound guidance improves success rates of axillary brachial plexus block. Can J Anaesth 2007; 54: 176-82. [CrossRef] 13. Hempel V, Baur KF. Regional Anaesthesie für Schülter, Arm und Hand. Urban &Schwarzenberg, München 1982; 1-33
  8. Fanelli G, Casati A, Garancini P, Torri G. Nerve stimulator and multiple injection technique for upper and lower limb blockade: failure rate, patient amleptance, and neurologic complications. Study Group on Regional Anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 847-52. [CrossRef] 15. Rodr