Skip to content

Parasagittal Vs Cornerpocket Approaches

Parasagittal Vs Cornerpocket Approaches for Ultrasound Guided Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block A Comparative Study

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06352333
Enrollment
80
Registered
2024-04-08
Start date
2024-04-02
Completion date
2025-01-01
Last updated
2024-04-08

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block

Keywords

brachial plexus block

Brief summary

Brachial plexus blocks are widely used to provide anesthesia for upper limb surgery. Although many different approaches to the brachial plexus block have been described, there is widespread acceptance that injecting at the supraclavicular level is the most reliable method in terms of spread of local anesthetic agent. Each approach of ultrasound guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block (US -SCBPB ) has a different success rate and complications. . A supraclavicular block can provide effective surgical anesthesia of the forearm and hand. The most commonly performed US- SCBPB is the corner pocket approach which was described by Chan et al with probe resting posterior to the clavicle, with postero latero-anteromedial orientation provides a very stable location, but has the disadvantage of looking across the first rib, with the apex of the lung visualized close to thePlexus . A new Parasagittal approach for brachial plexus block at the supraclavicular level was studied by Adrian Searle where the arc of the first rib was used to provide a deep limit to needle transit in order to minimize the risk of pneumothorax ;the aim of our study is to further evaluate the parasagittal approach for brachial plexus block and compare it with the popular corner pocket approach

Detailed description

After approval of research ethics committee of Sohag University hospital, a written consent will be taken from all participants to use their data for research and educational purposes The study will be carried on 80 participants who undergo elective upper limb surgery for a comparative study. In this study the investigators will use A 22 G Spinal needle , a high frequency linear probe of US and 2 % lidocaine and 0.5% bupivacaine as local anathetics ,Every participant will be informed about advantages and disadvantages of the research and has the right to withdraw at any stage without negative impact on medical service production. For both types of block: Wide bored cannula is inserted,Monitoring is applied (pulse,Ecg,Bp) Oxygen mask 5 liters , Participants were positioned supine with the head turned to the non-operative Side ( contralateral side), and a pillow under the head and shoulder with the ipsilateral arm placed adducted by the patient side. After that we sterilize the skin and apply a local anesthetic (2-3 ml of2% lidocaine). The total volume of the local anesthetic mixture was 30 ml (10 ml of 2% lidocaine mixed with 20 ml of 0.5% bupivacine ) Then participants will be divided randomly into 2 groups ,each group 40 participants.

Interventions

PROCEDUREsupraclavicular ultrasound guided brachial plexus block

two approaches of ultrasound guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block in upper limb surgery : the cornerpocket supraclavicular brachial plexus block and parasagittal supraclavicular brachial plexus block

Sponsors

Sohag University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Inclusion criteria: * 18to60 yearsold * ASA grade I to II * Elective upper limb surgery

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* 18 to 60 years old * ASA grade I to II * Elective upper limb surgery

Exclusion criteria

* Patient refusal. * Patient with neurological deficit in the limb of surgery * Patients with psychiatric disease. * Coagulopathy. * Morbid obesity. * Known allergy to used local anathetics * Local infection at the block site.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Needle visibility in both approaches1 yearMeasure the visibility of the needles in the ultrasound

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Duration of sensory and motor block1 yearMeasure the time of sensory and motor block start to happen after injecting local anathetics

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Success rate1 yearMeasrue number of failed and successful nerve blocks
Complications1 yearMeasure complications of the block

Countries

Egypt

Contacts

Primary ContactNada t Ahmed, resident
nada_abdelrohman@yahoo.com01069459544
Backup ContactWael A Mahmoud, assistant professor
01020363508

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026