Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2012 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 3

The effects of axillary block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients*

Sayfa
457–464
Yayın Tarihi
2012-03-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: Axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients provided a similarly good quality of the block and lack of systemic toxicity.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:To compare the sensory and motor block quality in axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and methods: Examined were 60 patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery of the distal upper extremity (nonuremic group: group N, n = 30) or creation of an arteriovenous fistula (uremic group: group U, n = 30) with an axillary brachial plexus block.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: Axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients provided a similarly good quality of the block and lack of systemic toxicity.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Key words: Axillary block · multiple injections · ropivacaine

Özet

To compare the sensory and motor block quality in axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients. Materials and methods: Examined were 60 patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery of the distal upper extremity (nonuremic group: group N, n = 30) or creation of an arteriovenous fistula (uremic group: group U, n = 30) with an axillary brachial plexus block. The median, radial, ulnar, and musculocutaneous nerves were selectively localized by nerve stimulation. After obtaining an appropriate peripheral motor response, predetermined volumes of ropivacaine (0.5%), in accordance with a formula, were selectively injected to the 4 nerves by multiple injections in both groups. Sensory and motor block were assessed. Results: At 30 min, complete sensory and motor block was observed at a rate of 95% in the ulnar nerve innervation area and 100% in the other 3 nerves in group U, whereas these rates were 95% in the musculocutaneous nerve innervation area and 100% in the other 3 nerves in group N. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Conclusion: Axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients provided a similarly good quality of the block and lack of systemic toxicity.

Abstract

To compare the sensory and motor block quality in axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients. Materials and methods: Examined were 60 patients scheduled for orthopedic surgery of the distal upper extremity (nonuremic group: group N, n = 30) or creation of an arteriovenous fistula (uremic group: group U, n = 30) with an axillary brachial plexus block. The median, radial, ulnar, and musculocutaneous nerves were selectively localized by nerve stimulation. After obtaining an appropriate peripheral motor response, predetermined volumes of ropivacaine (0.5%), in accordance with a formula, were selectively injected to the 4 nerves by multiple injections in both groups. Sensory and motor block were assessed. Results: At 30 min, complete sensory and motor block was observed at a rate of 95% in the ulnar nerve innervation area and 100% in the other 3 nerves in group U, whereas these rates were 95% in the musculocutaneous nerve innervation area and 100% in the other 3 nerves in group N. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Conclusion: Axillary brachial plexus block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients provided a similarly good quality of the block and lack of systemic toxicity.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÇEVİK, H., MAHLİ, A., COŞKUN, D. (2012). The effects of axillary block using the multiple injection method with ropivacaine in uremic and nonuremic patients*. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 3, 457–464. https://ajindex.com/articles/723505

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Crews JC, Weller RS, Moss J, James RL. Levobupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus block: a pharmacokinetic and clinical comparison in patients with normal function or renal disease. Anesth Analg 2002; 95: 219-23. Alsati RA, el-Dawlatly AA, al-Salman M, Jommaa S, Amro K, Dweiri MA et al. Arteriovenous fi stula in chronic renal failure patients: comparison between three diff erent anesthetic techniques. Middle East J Anesthesiol 1999; 15: 305-14.
  2. Mouquet C, Bitker MO, Bailliart O, Rottembourg J, Clergue F, Montejo LS et al. Anesthesia for creation of a forearm fi stula in patients with endstage renal failure. Anesthesiology 1989; 70: 909-14.
  3. Gould DB, Aldrete JA. Bupivacaine cardiotoxicity in a patient with renal failure. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1983; 27: 18-21.
  4. Rice AS, Pither CE, Tucker GT. Plasma concentrations of bupivacaine aft er supraclavicular brachial plexus blockade in patients with chronic renal failure. Anaesthesia 1991; 46: 354-7.
  5. Martin R, Beauregard L, Tétrault JP. Brachial plexus blockade and renal failure. Anesthesiology 1988; 69: 405-6.
  6. Pere P, Solonen M, Jolinen M, Rosenberg PH, Neuvonen PJ, Haasio J. Pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine in uremic patient aft er axillary brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg 2003; 96: 563-9.
  7. Hempel V, Baur KF. Regional Anaesthesie für Schülter. Arm und Hand. Munich: Urban & Schwarzenberg; 1982. p.60-4. 9. Tran DQH, Russo G, Muñoz L, Zaouter C, Finlayson RJ. A prospective, randomized comparison between ultrasound- guided supraclavicular, infraclavicular and axillary brachial plexus blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2009; 34: 366-71.
  8. Bromage PR, Gertel M. Brachial plexus anesthesia in chronic renal failure. Anesthesiology 1972; 36: 488-93.
  9. Knudsen K, Beckman Suurküla M, Bloomberg S, Sjövall J, Edvardsson N. Central nervous and cardiovascular eff ects of i.v. infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and placebo in volunteers. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78: 507-14.
  10. Scott DB, Lee A, Fagan D, Bloomfi eld P, Lundh R. Acute toxicity of ropivacaine compared with that of bupivacaine. Anesth Analg 1989; 69: 563-9.
  11. Grossman SH, Davis D, Kitchell BB, Shand DG, Routledge PA. Diazepam and lidocaine plasma protein binding in renal disease. Clin Pharmacol Th er 1982; 31: 350-7.
  12. Mostert JW, Evers JL, Hobika GH, Moore RH, Kenny GM, Murphy GP. Th e haemodynamic response to chronic renal failure as studied in the azotaemic state. Br J Anaesth 1970; 42: 397-411. Norio K. Mäkisalo H, Isoniemi H, Groop PH, Pere P, Lindgren L. Are diabetic patients in