ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The need of a neurostimulator for a successful nerve block was questioned in different block types after ultrasound had become standard. AIM: To determine the effect of neurostimulator use on block success in the costoclavicular block (CCB). METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing upper limb surgery were enrolled in the study. Patients using ultrasound and injection pressure manometer were divided as Group USP, and those using ultrasound, injection pressure manometer, and neurostimulator were divided as Group USPN. After block was applied, sensory and motor block levels were measured on a numeric scale. The block was considered successful when the desired score was reached or general anesthesia was not required intraoperatively. The number of successful and unsuccessful blocks for each group was summed up. The successful block rate was compared as the primary objective. Block application time, time to readiness for surgery, the number of needle passes, diaphragm paralysis rate, and complication rate were compared as secondary goals. RESULTS: Block success rate was 90% (27/30) in Group USP and 96.7% (29/30) in Group USPN. There was no statistical difference in terms of block success rate. Block application time was significantly shorter in Group USP (207.2 ± 32.7 s) when compared to Group USPN (280.9 ± 70.1 s). Other secondary outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION: Neurostimulator use did not affect block success in the CCB. Neurostimulator utilization prolonged block application time explicitly and did not change the complication rate. Ultrasound and injection pressure manometer are sufficient for a safe and successful CCB.
Subject(s)
Nerve Block , Humans , Female , Male , Adult , Middle Aged , Nerve Block/methods , Treatment Outcome , Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosage , Young Adult , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods , AgedABSTRACT
AIM: This prospectively-planned, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study aims to evaluate the effect of 1200 mg gabapentin premedication on the incidence and severity of propofol and rocuronium injection pain. METHOD: One hundred patients, between 18-60 years of age and ASA I-II for elective surgery planned under general anaesthetic, were randomized and divided into two groups. Two hours before the operation, the patients were given either a placebo tablet (Group P, n = 50) or 1200 mg gabapentin tablet (Group G, n = 50). On the back of the non-dominant hand, a vein was opened using a 20 G cannula , 0.9% NaCl was begun and preoxygenation was provided. For anaesthesia induction, 1% propofol at 800 ml/hr infusion rate was administered for 20 s. Propofol injection pain was evaluated up to the 20th second and recorded using a scale between 0 and 3 developed by McCrirrick and HunteR The remaining propofol dose (2.5 mg/kg), 5 ml saline and 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium were injected in that order over 10 seconds and rocuronium injection pain response was evaluated with a four point scale. RESULTS: Pain after propofol infusion average score (degree ≥ 1) (Group G = 0.5; Group P = 1.0) and incidence (Group G = 46%; Group P = 68%); and average withdrawal movements response score linked to rocuronium injection pain (≥ 1 response) (Group G = 0.3; Group P = 1.2) and incidence (Group G = 20%; Group P = 80%) were detected to be significantly lower in the gabapentin group compared to the placebo group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Premedication with 1200 mg gabapentin 2 hours before propofol and rocuronium injection reduced the incidence and severity of injection pain.
