Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: doi:10.22028/D291-40569
Volltext verfügbar? / Dokumentlieferung
Title: Risks and Benefits of Ultrasound, Nerve Stimulation, and Their Combination for Guiding Peripheral Nerve Blocks: A Retrospective Registry Analysis
Author(s): Bomberg, Hagen
Wetjen, Laura
Wagenpfeil, Stefan
Schöpe, Jakob
Kessler, Paul
Wulf, Hinnerk
Wiesmann, Thomas
Standl, Thomas
Gottschalk, André
Döffert, Jens
Hering, Werner
Birnbaum, Jürgen
Kutter, Bernd
Winckelmann, Jörg
Liebl-Biereige, Simone
Meissner, Winfried
Vicent, Oliver
Koch, Thea
Bürkle, Hartmut
Sessler, Daniel I
Volk, Thomas
Language: English
Title: Anesthesia and analgesia
Volume: 127
Issue: 4
Pages: 1035-1043
Publisher/Platform: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Year of Publication: 2018
DDC notations: 610 Medicine and health
Publikation type: Journal Article
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Ultrasound, nerve stimulation, and their combination are all considered acceptable ways to guide peripheral nerve blocks. Which approach is most effective and associated with the fewest complications is unknown. We therefore used a large registry to analyze whether there are differences in vascular punctures, multiple skin punctures, and unintended paresthesia. METHODS: Twenty-six thousand seven hundred and thirty-three cases were extracted from the 25-center German Network for Regional Anesthesia registry between 2007 and 2016 and grouped into ultrasound-guided puncture (n = 10,380), ultrasound combined with nerve stimulation (n=8173), and nerve stimulation alone (n = 8180). The primary outcomes of vascular puncture, multiple skin punctures, and unintended paresthesia during insertion were compared with conditional logistic regression after 1:1:1 propensity score matching. Results are presented as odds ratios and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Propensity matching successfully paired 2508 patients with ultrasound alone (24% of 10,380 patients), 2508 patients with a combination of ultrasound/nerve stimulation (31% of 8173 patients), and 2508 patients with nerve stimulation alone (31% of 8180 patients). After matching, no variable was imbalanced (standardized differences <0.1). Compared with ultrasound guidance alone, the odds of multiple skin punctures (2.2 [1.7–2.8]; P < .001) and vascular puncture (2.7 [1.6–4.5]; P < .001) were higher with nerve stimulation alone, and the odds for unintended paresthesia were lower with nerve stimulation alone (0.3 [0.1–0.7]; P = .03). The combined use of ultrasound/nerve stimulation showed higher odds of multiple skin punctures (1.5 [1.2–1.9]; P = .001) and lower odds of unintended paresthesia (0.4 [0.2–0.8]; P = .007) compared with ultrasound alone. Comparing the combined use of ultrasound/nerve stimulation with ultrasound alone, the odds for vascular puncture (1.3 [0.7–2.2]; P = .4) did not differ significantly. Systemic toxicity of local anesthetics was not observed in any patient with ultrasound guidance alone, in 1 patient with the combined use of ultrasound and nerve stimulation, and in 1 patient with nerve stimulation alone. CONCLUSIONS: Use of ultrasound alone reduced the odds of vascular and multiple skin punctures. However, the sole use of ultrasound increases the odds of paresthesia.
DOI of the first publication: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003480
URL of the first publication: https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/fulltext/2018/10000/risks_and_benefits_of_ultrasound,_nerve.33.aspx
Link to this record: urn:nbn:de:bsz:291--ds-405691
hdl:20.500.11880/36451
http://dx.doi.org/10.22028/D291-40569
ISSN: 0003-2999
Date of registration: 22-Sep-2023
Faculty: M - Medizinische Fakultät
Department: M - Anästhesiologie
M - Medizinische Biometrie, Epidemiologie und medizinische Informatik
Professorship: M - Prof. Dr. Thomas Volk
M - Prof. Dr. Stefan Wagenpfeil
M - Keiner Professur zugeordnet
Collections:SciDok - Der Wissenschaftsserver der Universität des Saarlandes

Files for this record:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in SciDok are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.