Revision Carpal Tunnel Release With Umbilical Cord Allograft: A Four-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Refractory symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome can persist or reoccur after carpal tunnel release (CTR) surgery in 1% to 25% of patients, with up to 12% of patients requiring secondary surgery. If revision surgery is required, the results are much less successful compared to primary surgery. In this study, we investigated whether cryopreserved human umbilical cord allograft placement during CTR revision surgery improved short- and long-term surgical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a single-center cohort analysis of patients between January 2015 and July 2018 who underwent secondary open revision CTR with umbilical cord allograft for recurrent or persistent compression neuropathy of the median nerve. Surgical outcomes of patients in the study group-reduction of pain, paresthesia, and weakness; complications; and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) scores-were compared to the outcomes of controls without umbilical cord allograft use who were operated on by the same surgeon between December 2011 and September 2015. Results: A total of 37 patients underwent CTR with (n=26) and without (n=11) umbilical cord allograft (mean follow-up of 4 years). Following surgery, preoperative symptoms of pain (96% vs 73%, P=0.048) and paresthesia (100% vs 73%, P=0.014) were significantly improved in the patients who received umbilical cord allograft. Mean QuickDASH scores (19.0 vs 23.7, P=0.58) and preoperative weakness (90% vs 67%, P=0.14) were improved in the patients who received umbilical cord allograft but were nonsignificant. Short- and long-term complications were similar between groups (P=0.56, P=0.51, respectively). Conclusion: This study suggests that human umbilical cord allograft placement during open revision CTR is safe and effective for improving long-term symptoms of compressive neuropathy in patients with recurrent carpal tunnel syndrome.

Perineural Liposomal Bupivacaine for Postoperative Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Upper Extremity Orthopedic Surgery: A Prospective and Randomized Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Upper extremity surgery is commonly performed in the ambulatory setting and is associated with moderate to severe postoperative pain. METHODS: Patients scheduled for upper extremity orthopedic surgery with a peripheral nerve block were randomized to receive either an ultrasound-guided single-injection supraclavicular block or ultrasound-guided median, ulnar, and radial nerve blocks (forearm blocks) performed at the level of the mid to proximal forearm with liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel) combined with a short-acting supraclavicular block. A sham block was performed in an attempt to blind enrollees in the control group. We administered the EuroQol 5D-5L questionnaire preoperatively and on postoperative days 1-3 and considered the results the primary outcome of our investigation. Block procedure times, postanesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay, instances of nausea/vomiting, need for narcotic administration, and patient satisfaction were also assessed. RESULTS: We observed no significant differences in postoperative EuroQol scores between the 2 groups and no significant differences in patient demographics, PACU length of stay, or side effects in the PACU. In some instances, the short-acting supraclavicular block resolved in the PACU, and these patients reported higher pain scores and required titration of analgesics prior to discharge. CONCLUSION: Larger prospective studies are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine in patients undergoing upper extremity surgery. Liposomal bupivacaine is currently only approved for local anesthetic infiltration use.

Distal Peripheral Nerve Blocks in the Forearm as an Alternative to Proximal Brachial Plexus Blockade in Patients Undergoing Hand Surgery: A Prospective and Randomized Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: Limited data exist regarding the role of perineural blockade of the distal median, ulnar, and radial nerves as a primary anesthetic in patients undergoing hand surgery. We conducted a prospective and randomized pilot study to compare these techniques to brachial plexus blocks as a primary anesthetic in this patient population. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for hand surgery were randomized to receive either an ultrasound-guided supraclavicular, infraclavicular, or axillary nerve block (brachial plexus blocks) or ultrasound-guided median, ulnar, and radial nerve blocks performed at the level of the mid to proximal forearm (forearm blocks). The ability to undergo surgery without analgesic or local anesthetic supplementation was the primary outcome. Block procedure times, postanesthesia care unit length of stay, instances of nausea/vomiting, and need for narcotic administration were also assessed. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar in terms of the need for conversion to general anesthesia or analgesic or local anesthetic supplementation, with only 1 patient in the forearm block group and 2 in the brachial plexus block group requiring local anesthetic supplementation or conversion to general anesthesia. Similar durations in surgical and tourniquet times were also observed. Both groups reported similarly low numerical rating scale pain scores as well as the need for postoperative analgesic administration (2 patients in the forearm block group and 1 in the brachial plexus block group reported numerical rating scale pain scores > 0 and required opioid administration in the postanesthesia care unit). Block procedure characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Forearm blocks may be used as a primary anesthetic in patients undergoing hand surgery. Further research is warranted to determine the appropriateness of these techniques in patients undergoing surgery in the thumb or proximal to the hand. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

Compartment syndrome in a patient treated with perineural liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel).

Acute compartment syndrome is a condition that may result in sensorimotor deficits and loss of function of the affected limb as a result of ischemic injury. It is considered a surgical emergency and prompt diagnosis and treatment results in more favorable outcomes. The use of regional anesthesia is controversial in patients at risk for compartment syndrome due to concern of its potential to mask symptoms of the condition. A 44-year-old African American male presented to surgery for open reduction and internal fixation of a comminuted distal radius fracture. As part of an off-label, investigator-initiated, and institutional review board-approved study, he received a perineural injection of liposomal bupivacaine (Exparel) around the median, ulnar, and radial nerves at the level of the proximal forearm. The following morning, his initial complaints of numbness and incisional pain progressively evolved into worsening numbness, diffuse discomfort, and pain with passive movement. A diagnosis of compartment syndrome was made and he underwent an emergency fasciotomy. The diagnosis of compartment syndrome requires a high index of suspicion and prompt treatment. This patient's changing pattern of symptoms-rather than his pain complaints alone-resulted in the diagnosis of compartment syndrome treated with emergent fasciotomy in spite of finger numbness that was initially attributed to the liposomal bupivacaine. While the use of liposomal bupivacaine did not preclude the diagnosis of compartment syndrome in our patient, it should be used with caution in patients at risk for compartment syndrome until additional data, particularly regarding block characteristics, are available.

Distal peripheral nerve blockade for patients undergoing hand surgery: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the use of peripheral nerve blockade at the level of the forearm, and most studies regard these procedures as rescue techniques for failed or incomplete blocks. The purpose of the study was to investigate patients undergoing hand surgery with distal peripheral nerve (forearm) blocks and compare them with patients having similar procedures under more proximal brachial plexus blockade. No investigations comparing distal nerve blockade to proximal approaches are currently reported in the literature. METHODS: Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for patients who had undergone hand surgery with a peripheral nerve block between November 2012 and October 2013. The primary outcome was the ability to provide a primary anesthetic without the need for general anesthesia or local anesthetic supplementation by the surgical team. Secondary outcome measures included narcotic administration during the block and intraoperative procedures, block performance times, and the need for rescue analgesics in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU). RESULTS: No statistical difference in conversion rates to general anesthesia was observed between the two groups. Total opiate administration for the block and surgical procedure was lower in the forearm block group. There was no difference in block performance times or need for rescue analgesics in the PACU. CONCLUSIONS: Forearm blocks are viable alternatives to proximal blockade and are effective as a primary anesthetic technique in patients undergoing hand surgery. Compared to the more proximal approaches, these blocks have the benefits of not causing respiratory compromise, the ability to be performed bilaterally, and may be safer in anticoagulated patients.