首页> 外文期刊>Yonsei Medical Journal >Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block Techniques: Perineural Injection versus Single or Double Perivascular Infiltration
【24h】

Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block Techniques: Perineural Injection versus Single or Double Perivascular Infiltration

机译:超声引导下腋下臂丛神经阻滞技术的比较:神经周注射与单或双周血管浸润

获取原文
           

摘要

Purpose We compared three methods of ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block, which were single, and double perivascular (PV) infiltration techniques, and a perineural (PN) injection technique. Materials and Methods 78 patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II undergoing surgery of the forearm, wrist, or hand were randomly allocated to three groups. 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 5 μg/mL was used. The PN group (n=26) received injections at the median, ulnar, and radial nerve with 8 mL for each nerve. The PV1 group (n=26) received a single injection of 24 mL at 12-o'clock position of the axillary artery. The PV2 group (n=26) received two injections of 12 mL each at 12-o'clock and 6-o'clock position. For all groups, musculocutaneous nerve was blocked separately. Results The PN group (391.2±171.6 sec) had the longest anesthetic procedure duration than PV1 (192.8±59.0 sec) and PV2 (211.4±58.6 sec). There were no differences in onset time. The average induction time was longer in PN group (673.4±149.6 sec) than PV1 (557.6±194.9 sec) and PV2 (561.5±129.8 sec). There were no differences in the success rate (89.7% vs. 86.2% vs. 89.7%). Conclusion The PV injection technique consisting of a single injection in 12-o'clock position above the axillary artery in addition to a musculocutaneous nerve block is equally effective and less time consuming than the PN technique. Therefore, the PV technique is an alternative method that may be used in busy clinics or for difficult cases.
机译:目的我们比较了超声引导腋下臂丛神经阻滞的三种方法,分别是单,双血管周围(PV)浸润技术和神经周围(PN)注射技术。材料与方法将78例接受美国前肢,腕部或手部手术的美国麻醉医师学会I-II身体状况患者随机分为三组。使用2%利多卡因和肾上腺素5μg/ mL。 PN组(n = 26)在正中,尺骨和radial神经处注射,每条神经8毫升。 PV1组(n = 26)在腋动脉12点钟位置接受了24 mL单次注射。 PV2组(n = 26)在12点和6点位置分别接受了两次每次12 mL的注射。对于所有组,肌皮神经分别被阻塞。结果PN组(391.2±171.6秒)的麻醉持续时间比PV1(192.8±59.0秒)和PV2(211.4±58.6秒)最长。发病时间没有差异。 PN组的平均诱导时间(673.4±149.6秒)比PV1(557.6±194.9秒)和PV2(561.5±129.8秒)更长。成功率没有差异(89.7%对86.2%对89.7%)。结论PV注射技术比PN技术同样有效,且耗时少,该技术由腋动脉上方12点钟位置的单次注射以及肌皮神经阻滞组成​​。因此,PV技术是可用于繁忙诊所或困难病例的替代方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号