Infraclavicular versus costoclavicular approaches to ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The costoclavicular approach to brachial plexus block may have a more favorable anatomy than the classic infraclavicular approach. However, there are conflicting results in the literature regarding the comparative effectiveness of these two techniques. METHODS: We systematically searched for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing costoclavicular with infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks for upper extremity surgeries on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ovid. The outcomes of interest were sensory and motor block onset times, performance times, block failure, and complication rate. We performed statistical analyses using RevMan 5.4 and assessed heterogeneity using the Cochran Q test and I2 statistics. We appraised the risk of bias according to Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool. RESULTS: We included 5 RCTs and 374 patients, of whom 189 (50.5%) were randomized to undergo costoclavicular block. We found no statistically significant differences between the two techniques regarding sensory block onset time in minutes (Mean Difference [MD = -0.39 min]; 95% CI -2.46 to 1.68 min; p = 0.71); motor block onset time in minutes (MD = -0.34 min; 95% CI -0.90 to 0.22 min; p = 0.23); performance time in minutes (MD = -0.12 min; 95% CI -0.89 to 0.64 min; p = 0.75); incidence of block failure (RR = 1.59; 95% CI 0.63 to 3.39; p = 0.63); and incidence of complications (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.20 to 1.84; p = 0.37). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that the CCV block may exhibit similar sensory and motor onset times when compared to the classic ICV approach in adults undergoing distal upper extremity surgery, with comparable rates of block failure and complications.

Standardizing nomenclature in regional anesthesia: an ASRA-ESRA Delphi consensus study of upper and lower limb nerve blocks.

BACKGROUND: Inconsistent nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques hinder scientific communication and engender confusion; this in turn has implications for research, education and clinical implementation of regional anesthesia. Having produced standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques, we aimed to similarly do so for upper and lower limb peripheral nerve blocks. METHODS: We performed a three-round Delphi international consensus study to generate standardized names and anatomical descriptions of upper and lower limb regional anesthetic techniques. A long list of names and anatomical description of blocks of upper and lower extremities was produced by the members of the steering committee. Subsequently, two rounds of anonymized voting and commenting were followed by a third virtual round table to secure consensus for items that remained outstanding after the first and second rounds. As with previous methodology, strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94, 91 and 65 collaborators participated in the first, second and third rounds, respectively. We achieved strong consensus for 38 names and 33 anatomical descriptions, and weak consensus for five anatomical descriptions. We agreed on a template for naming peripheral nerve blocks based on the name of the nerve and the anatomical location of the blockade and identified several areas for future research. CONCLUSIONS: We achieved consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques for upper and lower limb nerve blocks, and recommend using this framework in clinical and academic practice. This should improve research, teaching and learning of regional anesthesia to eventually improve patient care.

Superior Trunk Block Is an Effective Phrenic-Sparing Alternative to Interscalene Block for Shoulder Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The interscalene block (ISB) is the standard regional anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy. However, the superior trunk block (STB) is an alternative with a potentially safer profile. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the incidence and degree of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis and block efficacy of these techniques. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The main outcome was total hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. We used the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess the certainty of evidence. Four RCTs and 359 patients were included. The STB group showed lower total hemidiaphragmatic paralysis (RR 0.07; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.14; p<0.0001). The incidence of subjective dyspnea (p = 0.002) and Horner's syndrome (p<0.001) was significantly lower with STB relative to ISB. There was no significant difference between groups in block duration (p = 0.67). There was a high certainty of evidence in the main outcome as per the GRADE framework. Our findings suggest that STB has a better safety profile than ISB, resulting in lower rates of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis and dyspnea while providing a similar block. Therefore, STB could be preferred to ISB, especially in patients susceptible to phrenic nerve paralysis complications.

Lower Extremity Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Patients at Risk for Acute Compartment Syndrome.

A delayed acute compartment syndrome (ACS) diagnosis often results in devastating complications; however, the sensitivity of the classic signs and symptoms is very low. All analgesic modalities have been implicated in delaying the diagnosis, but there is very little evidence linking peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) with delays in diagnosis. In fact, there is evidence that PNBs may facilitate an early diagnosis; this may be in part due to differences in how ischemic and inflammatory pain is transmitted through unique nociceptive pathways. Collaboration is required to optimize care for patients at risk for ACS.

Interscalene block with liposomal bupivacaine versus continuous interscalene catheter in primary total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal pain regimens in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) now include regional anesthetic techniques. Historically, regional anesthesia for extended postoperative pain control in TSA was administered using a continuous interscalene catheter (CIC). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is used for its potential for similar pain control and fewer complications compared with indwelling catheters. We evaluated the efficacy of interscalene LB compared with a CIC in postoperative pain control for patients undergoing TSA. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary-care academic medical center including consecutive patients undergoing primary anatomic or reverse TSA from 2016 to 2020 who received either single-shot LB or a CIC for perioperative pain control. Perioperative and outcome variables were collected. The primary outcome was postoperative pain control, whereas the secondary outcome was health care utilization. RESULTS: The study included 565 patients, with 242 in the CIC cohort and 323 in the LB cohort. Demographic characteristics including sex (P = .99) and race (P = .81) were similar between the cohorts. The LB cohort had significantly lower mean pain scores at 24 hours (3 vs. 2, P < .001) and 36 hours (3 vs. 2, P < .001) postoperatively. The CIC cohort showed a higher percentage of patients experiencing a pain score of 9 or 10 postoperatively (29% vs. 17%, P = .001), whereas the LB cohort had a significantly greater proportion of opioid-free patients (32% vs. 10%, P < .001). Additionally, a greater proportion of CIC patients required opioid escalation to patient-controlled analgesia (7% vs. 2%, P = .002). The CIC cohort experienced a greater length of stay (2.3 days vs. 2.1 days, P = .01) and more 30-day emergency department visits (5% vs. 2%, P = .038). CONCLUSIONS: LB demonstrated lower mean pain scores at 24 and 36 hours postoperatively and lower rates of severe postoperative pain. Additionally, LB patients showed significantly higher rates of opioid-free pain regimens. These results suggest that as part of a multimodal pain regimen in primary shoulder arthroplasty, LB may provide greater reductions in pain and opioid use when compared with CICs.

Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. METHODS: Following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. RESULTS: Seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. CONCLUSION: By means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia.

Standardizing nomenclature in regional anesthesia: an ASRA-ESRA Delphi consensus study of abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall blocks.

BACKGROUND: There is heterogeneity in the names and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques. This may have adverse consequences on education, research, and implementation into clinical practice. We aimed to produce standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques. METHODS: We conducted an international consensus study involving experts using a three-round Delphi method to produce a list of names and corresponding descriptions of anatomical targets. After long-list formulation by a Steering Committee, the first and second rounds involved anonymous electronic voting and commenting, with the third round involving a virtual round table discussion aiming to achieve consensus on items that had yet to achieve it. Novel names were presented where required for anatomical clarity and harmonization. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50% to 74% agreement. RESULTS: Sixty expert Collaborators participated in this study. After three rounds and clarification, harmonization, and introduction of novel nomenclature, strong consensus was achieved for the names of 16 block names and weak consensus for four names. For anatomical descriptions, strong consensus was achieved for 19 blocks and weak consensus was achieved for one approach. Several areas requiring further research were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Harmonization and standardization of nomenclature may improve education, research, and ultimately patient care. We present the first international consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of blocks of the abdominal wall, chest wall, and paraspinal blocks. We recommend using the consensus results in academic and clinical practice.

A Case Report of Bilateral Phrenic Nerve Dysfunction After Unilateral Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: Unveiling Preexisting Diaphragmatic Dysfunction.

A 48-year-old woman with a history of cardiac surgery developed severe dyspnea and anxiety following right-sided supraclavicular nerve block for hand surgery. In this case, right phrenic nerve blockade from a supraclavicular block unmasked a subclinical hemidiaphragmatic paresis from phrenic nerve injury on the left, the latter likely due to previous cardiac surgery. When performing brachial plexus block at or above the clavicle, particularly for prior cardiothoracic surgical patients, anesthesiologists can easily, quickly, and inexpensively use point-of-care ultrasound to assess whether any degree of phrenic nerve dysfunction exists on the contralateral side, as patients may be asymptomatic at baseline.

The relative analgesic value of a femoral nerve block versus adductor canal block following total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled, double-blinded study.

BACKGROUND: Multiple comparative studies report that adductor canal blocks provide similar pain relief to femoral nerve blocks following total knee arthroplasty. However, adductor canal blockade fails to anesthetize several important femoral nerve branches that contribute to knee innervation. We sought to clarify this anatomic discrepancy by performing both blocks in sequence, using patients as their own controls. We hypothesized that patients would experience additional pain relief following a superimposed femoral nerve block, demonstrating that these techniques are not equivalent. METHODS: Sixteen patients received continuous adductor canal block before undergoing knee arthroplasty under general anesthesia. In the recovery room, patients reported their pain score on a numeric scale of 0-10. Once a patient reached a score of five or greater, he/she was randomized to receive an additional femoral nerve block using 2% chloroprocaine or saline sham, and pain scores recorded every 5 min for 30 min. Patients received opioid rescue as needed. Anesthesiologists performing and assessing block efficacy were blinded to group allocation. RESULTS: Patients randomized to chloroprocaine versus saline reported significantly improved median pain scores 30 min after the femoral block (2.0 vs. 5.5, P = 0.0001). Patients receiving chloroprocaine also required significantly fewer morphine equivalents during the 30 min post-femoral block (1.0 vs. 4.5 mg, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Adductor canal block is a useful technique for postoperative pain following total knee arthroplasty, but it does not provide equivalent analgesic efficacy to femoral nerve block. Future studies comparing efficacy between various block sites along the thigh are warranted.

Pressure monitoring: The evidence so far.

Nerve injury is a relatively rare but devastating complication of peripheral nerve blockade (PNB). Monitoring injection pressure during PNB is one method advocated to prevent injury by detecting needle tip placement in a noncompliant position (intraneural or abutting the epineurium). Animal studies show that gross neural damage and clinical injury are associated with injection pressures exceeding 15-20 psi. In contrast, pressures <15 psi are associated with an extraneural needle tip position and no histologic or clinical injury. Injection pressure monitoring has been shown to prevent injection against the brachial plexus roots or femoral nerve during peripheral nerve block. Multiple methods are available to monitor injection pressure, and most of them are inexpensive and easy to use. Large-scale registry database or pragmatic trials are indicated to show that injection pressure monitoring reduces injury in a patient setting.

Updates in Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for orthopedics involve a multidisciplinary approach to accelerating return to function, reducing pain, improving patient comfort and satisfaction, reducing complications from the surgical procedure, reducing hospital length of stay, and reducing costs. ERAS pathways for patients receiving total knee arthroplasty are different from those having intracavitary surgery; they are less focused on fluid homeostasis and gut motility than they are with optimizing systemic and local analgesics and providing a balance between the highest quality pain control and accelerated return to ambulation.

Current devices used for the monitoring of injection pressure during peripheral nerve blocks.

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral nerve blocks are generally safe. However, there is a small but real associated risk of needle-related complications such as nerve injury. Nerve injury has been associated with high pressure injections in animals, and some data supports the use of monitors to limit injection pressure during these procedures. AREAS COVERED: A literature search for articles with keywords 'injection,' 'pressure,' and 'nerve' was conducted. All currently available devices designed to monitor injection pressure and/or prevent high pressure injections were reviewed. There are three classes of devices that are used to monitor injection pressure. The first is based on Boyle's Law, and involves the clinician limiting the compression of a known quantity of air in the syringe, thereby preventing a corresponding increase in pressure. The second is the use of electronic pressure manometers present in syringe pumps. Finally, two specialized in-line devices, the BSmart™ and the NerveGuard™, serve to warn of, or prevent, respectively, injection at high pressures. EXPERT COMMENTARY: While each of the reviewed methods has its advantages and drawbacks, all of the means of injection pressure monitoring are relatively simple and inexpensive to perform. More outcomes data are required to demonstrate a reduction in injury with their use.

The Use of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Erector Spinae Plane Block to Minimize Opioid Consumption for Breast Surgery: A Case Report.

The erector spinae plane block is a novel interfascial plane block that can provide thoracic and abdominal analgesia. We describe a patient with opioid intolerance scheduled for breast surgery who received an erector spinae plane block with liposomal bupivacaine as well as a supplemental T1 paravertebral block resulting in profound analgesia throughout her postoperative course. This case report demonstrates that use of liposomal bupivacaine in the erector spinae plane block can be successful in providing extended duration postoperative analgesia and minimizing systemic opioid requirements.

Peripheral nerve blocks in the management of postoperative pain: challenges and opportunities.

Peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) are increasingly used as a component of multimodal analgesia and may be administered as a single injection (sPNB) or continuous infusion via a perineural catheter (cPNB). We undertook a qualitative review focusing on sPNB and cPNB with regard to benefits, risks, and opportunities for optimizing patient care. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have shown superior pain control and reductions in opioid consumption in patients receiving PNB compared with those receiving intravenous opioids in a variety of upper and lower extremity surgical procedures. cPNB has also been associated with a reduction in time to discharge readiness compared with sPNB. Risks of PNB, regardless of technique or block location, include vascular puncture and bleeding, nerve damage, and local anesthetic systemic toxicity. Site-specific complications include quadriceps weakness in patients receiving femoral nerve block, and pleural puncture or neuraxial blockade in patients receiving interscalene block. The major limitation of sPNB is the short (12-24 hours) duration of action. cPNB may be complicated by catheter obstruction, migration, and leakage of local anesthetic as well as accidental removal of catheters. Potential infectious complications of catheters, although rare, include local inflammation and infection. Other considerations for ambulatory cPNB include appropriate patient selection, education, and need for 24/7 availability of a health care provider to address any complications. The ideal PNB technique would have a duration of action that is sufficiently long to address the most intense period of postsurgical pain; should be associated with minimal risk of infection, neurologic complications, bleeding, and local anesthetic systemic toxicity; and should be easy to perform, convenient for patients, and easy to manage in the postoperative period.