Forearm Injuries, Hand Injuries
Conditions
Keywords
Infraclavicular block, Retroclavicular block, Ultrasound
Brief summary
The retroclavicular approach for brachial plexus anesthesia requires an optimal angle between the needle and the ultrasound beam. Retroclavicular approach has already been proven effective and safe in the past. The general objective is to provide a formal comparison between the retroclavicular approach and coracoid infraclavicular approach for brachial plexus anaesthesia. This study should represent the differences between the two techniques.
Detailed description
Classic infraclavicular approach of the brachial plexus involves a needle puncture below the clavicle and advancing the needle with a 45-60 degree angle from cephalad to caudad. The aim is to advanced the block needle posterior to the axillary artery and to deposit the local anesthetic at that point, near the posterior cord. A U shaped spread around the artery should ensure distribution around all three cords. Ultrasound guidance is highly recommended and neurostimulation is optional. The retroclavicular approach is a variant to this classical technique. Ultrasound probe is positioned initially below the clavicle in a manner similar to the classic approach but is then rotated in a clockwise fashion (right arm) or counter-clockwise fashion (left arm) for about 25-35 degrees. The puncture site is just behind the clavicle at the most lateral point available. If initial entry point is optimal, needle direction is then parallel to ultrasound probe. The final aim and position of block needle is identical to classical approach. Entry point ensures a parallel alignment of the needle and the ultrasound beam, thus enabling almost perfect visualization of both artery, cords and block needle. This is turn optimizes safety, rapidity of technique, efficiency and efficacy. It is recognized that regional anesthesia is more difficult to perform in obese patients. Anatomic landmarks are harder to localize in this population and ultrasound guidance is more difficult because of the attenuation of the ultrasound beam by adipose tissue. The complication rate of regional techniques is also reported to be higher in the obese patient population.
Interventions
OTHERUltrasound guided coracoid infraclavicular block
Ultrasound guided infraclavicular block for forearm or hand surgery
DRUGBupivacaine
DEVICEUltrasound
Ultrasound guided retroclavicular block for forearm or hand surgery
Sponsors
Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Masking
DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* 18-80 years * BMI\>30 * Forearm- Hand surgery
Exclusion criteria
* \<18 years * Local infection * Coagulopaty
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Technique duration | Measured directly during the procedure with a chronometer. | The performance time corresponds to the sum of imaging time and needling time. It is expressed in minutes. Analysis of the primary outcome: performance time will be analyzed with a non-inferiority test of the averages, with the objective of finding that the experimental retroclavicular approach is no longer to perform than the coracoid infraclavicular approach. |
| Surgery completion under regional block | Success is defined at end of surgery for which block was done, generally within 1 to 3 hours after block is performed | Success rate is defined as the completion of the intended surgery under regional anaesthesia with retroclavicular block without the need for a rescue technique. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Sensorial block progression | Assessed 10, 20 and 30 minutes after block completion | Progress of the sensory block in the distribution of the radial, median, ulnar, musculocutaneous, and medial cutaneous nerves of the forearm and hand at 10, 20 and 30 minutes after block completion. The scale used is: 0:no sensitive block, 1:analgesia (loss of pain but not tactile sensation), 2:anesthesia (loss of pain and tactile sensation). |
| Motor Block Progression | Assessed 10, 20, 30 minutes after the block completion | Progress of the motor block in the distribution of the radial, median, ulnar, musculocutaneous nerves of the forearm and hand at 10, 20, and 30 minutes after block completion. The scale used is: 0: no motor block, 1: paresis, 2: paralysis. No units are attached to this scale. |
| Needle visualization | Assessed one week after study completion | Procedures will be recorded and reviewed simultaneously after study completion by 2 independent anesthesiologists skilled in US-guided regional anesthesia using a 5-point Likert scale to rate needle visibility (1=very poor,2=poor,3=fair,4=good,5=very good) |
Outcome results
None listed