Anatomical description of anaesthetic spread after deep erector spinae block at L-4. / Estudio anatómico de la distribución del volumen administrado tras bloqueo en el plano profundo del erector espinal a nivel lumbar.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic erector spinae plane (ESP) block is now used for postoperative analgesia. However, although reports of lumbar ESP have been published, the anesthetic spread and mechanism of action of this technique remains unclear. We describe the lumbar ESP block technique and evaluate the spread of 20ml of solution administered at the level of the transverse process of L4 in a cadaver model. METHODS: Observational study after 12 lumbar ESP blocks at L4 on a fresh cadaver model (6 bilaterally). The spread of 20ml of injected contrast solution was assessed by computed tomography in all 6 samples. Four of the samples were evaluated by anatomical study, 2 by plane dissection, and 2 others were frozen and cut into 2-2.5cm axial slices. RESULTS: The injected solution spread from L2 to L5 in a cranio-caudal direction in the erector spinae muscle, reaching the facet joints medially and the thoracolumbar fascia laterally. In 33% of cases the solution did not spread anterior to the transverse process; in 51%, spread was minimal and did not affect the corresponding spinal nerves, and in 2 samples (16%), spread was extensive and reached the corresponding spinal nerves. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar ESP at L4 always acts on the posterior branches of the spinal nerves, but seldom spreads to the paravertebral space to block the spinal nerve.

L4 erector spinal plane block after lumbar spine arthrodesi: A case-series. / Bloqueo del plano del erector espinal en L4 en cirugía de artrodesis lumbar: serie de casos.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic erector spinae plane block is now performed in many different surgical procedures, including lumbar spinal fusion. We evaluated the analgesic effect of lumbar ESP performed at L4 after lumbar spinal fusion surgery. METHODS AND CASE SERIES: Eight patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion were included in the case series. Erector spinae plane block was performed at L4 preoperatively, administering 20ml of 0.2% ropivacaine on each side. We recorded patient-reported pain intensity during the first 48 postoperative hours using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and rescue analgesia requirements. Pain at rest was controlled in all patients (VAS 0 to 3), although pain on movement ranged from mild to severe (VAS 0 to 8). Rescue analgesia consumption ranged from 1 to 22mg morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar ESP appears to contribute to pain control during the first 48hours after lumbar spinal fusion.

Cross-sectional area of the median nerve after intraneural vs perineural low volume administration. / Evaluación del área de sección del nervio mediano tras la inyección intraneural o perineural.

INTRODUCTION: To recognise the relationship between the needle tip and the median nerve during peripheral nerve block is of interest to avoid neural damage. However, signs of intraneural injection are not clearly established. The aim of this study was to define the changes observed in the peripheral nerve after the intraneural or perineural administration of 1ml of solution. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ultrasound guided median nerve blocks were performed in the forearm of 10 fresh cadavers on 60 occasions (3 per forearm). They were randomised into the intraneural (n=30) or perineural (n=30) location of the needle tip, after the consensus of location by 7 specialists. After 1ml of solution was injected an evaluation was made of the changes in the cross-sectional area of the nerve, as well as the displacement along the nerve. RESULTS: The cross-sectional area of the median nerve was increased in both groups, however, the increase was significantly higher in the intraneural group (perineural 0.007±0.013cm2 vs. intraneural 0.032±0.021cm2, P<.0001). An increase of more than 27% of the area ensures an intraneural injection in the median nerve according to the ROC curve analysis. Both proximal and distal diffusion were observed more frequently in the intraneural group (proximal: 86% vs 14%, P<.0001, Distal: 43% vs 4%, P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this experimental study, it is concluded that the injection of a small volume (1ml) allows to discriminate the disposition of the intraneural vs perineural needle in a high percentage of cases. Therefore, it is suggested that this "dose test" should be considered in the safety algorithms if it is required to reduce the incidence of intraneural injection.