Arcand Geneviève, Williams Stephan R, Chouinard Philippe, Boudreault Daniel, Harris Patrick, Ruel Monique, Girard François
Departments of *Anesthesiology and †Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Hôpital Notre-Dame, Montréal, Canada.
Anesth Analg. 2005 Sep;101(3):886-890. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000159168.69934.CC.
In this prospective study we compared ultrasound-guided (USG) infraclavicular and supraclavicular blocks for performance time and quality of block. We hypothesized that the infraclavicular approach would result in shorter performance times with a quality of block similar to that of the supraclavicular approach. Eighty patients were randomized into two equal groups: Group I (infraclavicular) and Group S (supraclavicular). All blocks were performed using ultrasound visualization with a 7.5-MHz linear probe and neurostimulation. The anesthetic mixture consisted of 0.5 mL/kg of bupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine hydrocarbonate 2% (1:3 vol.) with epinephrine 1:200,000. Sensory block, motor block, and supplementation rates were evaluated for the musculocutaneous, median, radial, and ulnar nerves. Surgical anesthesia without supplementation was achieved in 80% of patients in group I compared with 87% in Group S (P = 0.39). Supplementation rates were significantly different only for the radial territory: 18% in Group I versus 0% in group S (P = 0.006). Block performance times were not different between groups (4.0 min in Group I versus 4.65 min in Group S; P = 0.43). Technique-related pain scores were not different between groups (I: 2.0; S: 2.0; P = 1.00). We conclude that USG infraclavicular block is at least as rapidly executed as USG supraclavicular block and produces a similar degree of surgical anesthesia without supplementation.
在这项前瞻性研究中,我们比较了超声引导下(USG)锁骨下阻滞和锁骨上阻滞的操作时间和阻滞质量。我们假设锁骨下途径的操作时间会更短,且阻滞质量与锁骨上途径相似。80例患者被随机分为两组,每组40例:I组(锁骨下组)和S组(锁骨上组)。所有阻滞均在超声可视化下使用7.5MHz线性探头和神经刺激仪进行。麻醉混合液由0.5mL/kg的0.5%布比卡因和2%碳酸氢利多卡因(体积比1:3)加1:200,000肾上腺素组成。对肌皮神经、正中神经、桡神经和尺神经的感觉阻滞、运动阻滞及追加率进行评估。I组80%的患者无需追加即可达到手术麻醉效果,而S组为87%(P = 0.39)。仅在桡神经区域追加率有显著差异:I组为18%,S组为0%(P = 0.006)。两组间阻滞操作时间无差异(I组4.0分钟,S组4.65分钟;P = 0.43)。两组间技术相关疼痛评分无差异(I组:2.0;S组:2.0;P = 1.00)。我们得出结论,超声引导下锁骨下阻滞至少与超声引导下锁骨上阻滞执行速度一样快,且在无需追加的情况下产生相似程度的手术麻醉效果。