The Korean Journal of Pain

The Korean Pain Society (대한통증학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Ultrasound Guided Low Approach Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block for Upper Limb Surgery

  • Park, Sun Kyung (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital) ;
  • Sung, Min Ha (Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine) ;
  • Suh, Hae Jin (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital) ;
  • Choi, Yun Suk (Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital)
  • Received : 2015.09.03
  • Accepted : 2015.10.16
  • Published : 2016.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The interscalene brachial plexus block is widely used for pain control and anesthetic purposes during shoulder arthroscopic surgeries and surgeries of the upper extremities. However, it is known that interscalene brachial plexus block is not appropriate for upper limb surgeries because it does not affect the lower trunk (C8-T1, ulnar nerve) of the brachial plexus. Methods: A low approach, ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block (LISB) was performed on twenty-eight patients undergoing surgery of the upper extremities. The patients were assessed five minutes and fifteen minutes after the block for the degree of block in each nerve and muscle as well as for any complications. Results: At five minutes and fifteen minutes after the performance of the block, the degree of the block in the ulnar nerve was found to be $2.8{\pm}2.6$ and $1.1{\pm}1.8$, respectively, based on a ten-point scale. Motor block occurred in the median nerve after fifteen minutes in 26 of the 28 patients (92.8%), and in all of the other three nerves in all 28 patients. None of the patients received additional analgesics, and none experienced complications. Conclusions: The present study confirmed the achievement of an appropriate sensory and motor block in the upper extremities, including the ulnar nerve, fifteen minutes after LISB, with no complications.

Keywords

References

  1. Neal JM, Gerancher JC, Hebl JR, Ilfeld BM, McCartney CJ, Franco CD, et al. Upper extremity regional anesthesia: essentials of our current understanding, 2008. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2009; 34: 134-70. https://doi.org/10.1097/AAP.0b013e31819624eb
  2. Kim JH, Chen J, Bennett H, Lesser JB, Resta-Flarer F, Barczewska-Hillel A, et al. A low approach to interscalene brachial plexus block results in more distal spread of sensory-motor coverage compared to the conventional approach. Anesth Analg 2011; 112: 987-9. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820b5e8e
  3. Liu FC, Liou JT, Tsai YF, Li AH, Day YY, Hui YL, et al. Efficacy of ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block: a comparative study with nerve stimulator-guided method. Chang Gung Med J 2005; 28: 396-402.
  4. Burckett-St Laurent D, Chan V, Chin KJ. Refining the ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block: the superior trunk approach. Can J Anaesth 2014; 61: 1098-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-014-0237-3
  5. Gadsden JC, Tsai T, Iwata T, Somasundarum L, Robards C, Hadzic A. Low interscalene block provides reliable anesthesia for surgery at or about the elbow. J Clin Anesth 2009; 21: 98-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2008.06.031
  6. Renes SH, Rettig HC, Gielen MJ, Wilder-Smith OH, van Geffen GJ. Ultrasound-guided low-dose interscalene brachial plexus block reduces the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paresis. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2009; 34: 498-502. https://doi.org/10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181b49256
  7. Gautier P, Vandepitte C, Ramquet C, DeCoopman M, Xu D, Hadzic A. The minimum effective anesthetic volume of 0.75% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg 2011; 113: 951-5. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e31822b876f
  8. Fredrickson MJ, Smith KR, Wong AC. Importance of volume and concentration for ropivacaine interscalene block in preventing recovery room pain and minimizing motor block after shoulder surgery. Anesthesiology 2010; 112: 1374-81. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181d6929d
  9. Plante T, Rontes O, Bloc S, Delbos A. Spread of local anesthetic during an ultrasound-guided interscalene block: does the injection site influence diffusion? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2011; 55: 664-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02449.x
  10. Bharti N, Bhardawaj N, Wig J. Comparison of ultrasoundguided supraclavicular, infraclavicular and below-C6 interscalene brachial plexus block for upper limb surgery: a randomised, observer-blinded study. Anaesth Intensive Care 2015; 43: 468-72.
  11. Nadeau MJ, Levesque S, Dion N. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia for upper limb surgery. Can J Anaesth 2013; 60: 304-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-012-9874-6
  12. Kessler J, Schafhalter-Zoppoth I, Gray AT. An ultrasound study of the phrenic nerve in the posterior cervical triangle: implications for the interscalene brachial plexus block. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2008; 33: 545-50.

Cited by

  1. Easier and Safer Regional Anesthesia and Peripheral Nerve Block under Ultrasound Guidance vol.29, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2016.29.1.1
  2. A pictorial review of signature patterns living in musculoskeletal ultrasonography vol.29, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2016.29.4.217
  3. Ultrasound-Guided Inter-scalene Brachial Plexus Block with Superficial Cervical Plexus Block Compared with General Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Clavicular Surgery: A Comparative Analysis vol.13, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_185_18
  4. The estimation of minimum effective volume of 0.5% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided interscalene brachial plexus nerve block: A clinical trial vol.35, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_70_18
  5. Value of Anterior Band of the Inferior Glenohumeral Ligament Area as a Morphological Parameter of Adhesive Capsulitis vol.2019, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9301970
  6. Triple Monitoring May Avoid Intraneural Injection during Interscalene Brachial Plexus Block for Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Prospective Preliminary Study vol.10, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10040781