Effect of Neurostimulator Usage on Block Success in Costoclavicular Block: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-29 DOI:10.4103/njcp.njcp_476_23
S Soylu, D G Moralar, S Ş Şehirlioğlu, Ü Yaman, Ü A Türkmen
{"title":"Effect of Neurostimulator Usage on Block Success in Costoclavicular Block: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"S Soylu, D G Moralar, S Ş Şehirlioğlu, Ü Yaman, Ü A Türkmen","doi":"10.4103/njcp.njcp_476_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The need of a neurostimulator for a successful nerve block was questioned in different block types after ultrasound had become standard.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To determine the effect of neurostimulator use on block success in the costoclavicular block (CCB).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_476_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.

分享
查看原文
使用神经刺激器对肋锁阻滞成功率的影响:随机对照试验
背景:目的:确定神经刺激器的使用对肋锁阻滞(CCB)阻滞成功率的影响:60名接受上肢手术的患者参加了研究。使用超声波和注射压力计的患者分为 USP 组,使用超声波、注射压力计和神经刺激器的患者分为 USPN 组。实施阻滞后,用数字量表测量感觉和运动阻滞水平。当达到预期分数或术中无需全身麻醉时,即认为阻滞成功。每组成功和不成功阻滞的次数相加。将成功阻滞率作为主要目标进行比较。作为次要目标,对阻滞应用时间、手术准备时间、针刺次数、膈肌麻痹率和并发症发生率进行比较:结果:USP 组的阻滞成功率为 90%(27/30),USPN 组为 96.7%(29/30)。在阻滞成功率方面没有统计学差异。与 USPN 组(280.9 ± 70.1 秒)相比,USP 组的阻滞应用时间明显更短(207.2 ± 32.7 秒)。其他次要结果相似:结论:使用神经刺激器不会影响 CCB 的阻滞成功率。结论:使用神经刺激器不会影响 CCB 的阻滞成功率,使用神经刺激器明确延长了阻滞应用时间,但不会改变并发症发生率。超声波和注射压力计足以保证安全、成功的 CCB。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信