Supraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block

This review aimed to explore whether diaphragm-sparing regional techniques are more effective at preventing hemidiaphragm paralysis than conventional interscalene brachial plexus blockade (ISB) following shoulder surgery. Systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) including meta-analyses, meta-regression, trial sequential analyses (TSA) and GRADE methodology. Online databases (Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; EMBASE; Scopus; Web of Science; and international trial registries) were searched for RCTs up to December 2022. Adult patients undergoing shoulder surgery following ultrasound-guided brachial plexus blockade, where incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis was reported. Diaphragm-sparing techniques following ultrasound-guided brachial plexus blockade were included: modifications of ISB (low-volume, extrafascial, and lower concentration); superior trunk block; supraclavicular brachial plexus block, infraclavicular brachial plexus block; costoclavicular brachial plexus block; and anterior and posterior approaches to the suprascapular nerve block. The primary endpoint was the incidence of complete hemidiaphragmatic paralysis. Secondary endpoints included postoperative analgesia and safety-related outcomes. Twenty-eight RCTs involving 1737 subjects were identified. Of these, 22 were eligible for meta-analysis. Six regional techniques were analysed. The low-volume technique significantly reduced the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis as compared with the conventional ISB (risk ratio 0.62; 95 % CI 0.42 to 0.91; p = 0.02; absolute risk difference - 0.30 [95 % CI -0.39 to -0.20]; I2 = 80 %) at short-term follow-up. TSA confirmed the results of this meta-analysis but did not reach the required sample size by 19.5 %, indicating that the result was not definitive. The combined infraclavicular-suprascapular blocks, the extrafascial technique, the lower concentration technique, and the supraclavicular block reduced the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis by 97 %, 64 %, 57 % and 46 %, respectively. For the superior trunk block, TSA did not reach statistical significance. There is conclusive evidence that the extrafascial technique (high-level); lower concentration technique (moderate-level); and the supraclavicular blockade (low-level) are less detrimental to hemidiaphragmatic paralysis than the conventional ISB. However, the results for other comparisons were not definitive. Systematic review protocol: PROSPERO CRD42022335056.

Both perineural and intravenous dexamethasone have been proposed as effective adjuncts that prolong the duration of peripheral nerve blocks. The authors sought to explore whether combining systemic with perineural dexamethasone yields any additive or synergistic effect on the characteristics and analgesic effects of peripheral nerve blocks. Adult patients having distal radius open reduction and internal fixation and/or carpometacarpal arthroplasty under supraclavicular block were randomized to intravenous dexamethasone, a combination of perineural plus intravenous dexamethasone, or no dexamethasone (control). Sensory block duration was set as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included motor block duration; postoperative rebound pain scores as well as worst pain at 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, and 48 h; opioid consumption at 0 to 24 and 25 to 48 h; incidence of nausea/vomiting; and presence of burning sensation in the blocked limb at 24 and 48 h. The null hypothesis was lack of difference in sensory block duration between the three groups. A total of 104 patients were included in the analysis (intravenous dexamethasone, 37; intravenous plus perineural dexamethasone, 34; control, 33). Compared to intravenous dexamethasone alone, adding perineural dexamethasone did not yield any incremental benefits in any of the outcomes examined. The mean ± SD of sensory block duration was 21.3 ± 7.3 h in the intravenous dexamethasone group, 20.6 ± 6.1 h in the perineural plus intravenous group, and 16.8 ± 6.8 h in the control group. The mean difference (95% CI) of sensory block duration was significantly prolonged by 4.5 h (95% CI, 1.3 to 7.7; P = 0.006) in the intravenous dexamethasone group and 3.8 h (95% CI, 0.8 to 6.8; P = 0.015) in the perineural plus intravenous dexamethasone group compared to control; however, no difference was observed when the two dexamethasone groups were compared to each other (0.7 h [95% CI, -2.5 to 3.9]; P = 0.670). Compared to control, both intravenous and intravenous plus perineural dexamethasone similarly reduced 24-h pain scores and opioid consumption and decreased incidence of rebound pain. The authors' findings suggest that intravenous dexamethasone alone is sufficient to improve analgesic outcomes for patients receiving supraclavicular block for upper extremity surgery. Combining the intravenous and perineural dexamethasone routes does not yield an additive or synergistic effect on the characteristics and analgesic effects of supraclavicular block.

As the characteristics of the intertruncal approach to the supraclavicular block (IA-SCB) are uncertain, we aimed to compare its effect on sensory-motor blockade with that of the classical approach (CA) within 30 min post-block. In total, 122 patients undergoing elbow, forearm, wrist, or hand surgery were randomly assigned to receive CA-SCB or IA-SCB. Both groups received identical local anesthetic agents (1% lidocaine and 0.5% ropivacaine) in 25 ml total. The IA-SCB group received 15 ml between the middle and inferior trunks and 10 ml between the superior and middle trunks, while the CA-SCB group received 15 ml in the corner pocket and 10 ml in the center of the neural clusters. Sensory-motor blockade of all four terminal nerves was assessed every 5 min for 30 min. The non-inferiority threshold aimed to exclude the possibility that the IA-SCB was > 5% inferior to the CA-SCB in terms of the proportion of patients with complete sensory blockade at 20 min post-block. Complete sensory blockade at 20 min post-block was 79.3% and 72.7% with the CA-SCB and IA-SCB, respectively, exceeding the non-inferiority margin of -5% (-6.6%, 95% CI [-22.3% to 9.1%]; P value for non-inferiority = 0.206). Additionally, the IA-SCB showed an inferior musculocutaneous nerve blockade, longer performance time, and higher incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paresis. Our findings do not confirm the non-inferiority of the IA-SCB to the CA-SCB in achieving complete sensory blockade at 20 min post-block. Further research may be necessary to establish its efficacy in regional anesthesia.

Background: Several regional anesthesia (RA) techniques have been described for distal upper limb surgery. However, the best approach in terms of RA block success rate and safety is not well recognized. Objective: To assess and compare the surgical anesthesia and efficacy of axillary brachial plexus block with other RA techniques for hand and wrist surgery. The attainment of adequate surgical anesthesia 30 min after block placement was considered a primary outcome measure. Additionally, successful block outcomes were required without the use of supplemental local anesthetic injection, systemic opioid analgesia, or the need to convert to general anesthesia. Methods: We performed a systematic search in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CENTRAL. RCTs comparing axillary blocks with other brachial plexus block techniques, distal peripheral forearm nerve block, intravenous RA, and the wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) technique were included. Results: In total, 3070 records were reviewed, of which 28 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of adequate surgical anesthesia showed no significant difference between ultrasound-guided axillary block and supraclavicular block (RR: 0.94 [0.89, 1.00]; p = 0.06; I2 = 60.00%), but a statistically significant difference between ultrasound-guided axillary block and infraclavicular block (RR: 0.92 [0.88, 0.97]; p < 0.01; I2 = 53.00%). Ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks were performed faster than ultrasound-guided axillary blocks (SMD: 0.74 [0.30, 1.17]; p < 0.001; I2 = 85.00%). No differences in performance time between ultrasound-guided axillary and supraclavicular blocks were demonstrated. Additionally, adequate surgical anesthesia onset time was not significantly different between ultrasound-guided block approaches: ultrasound-guided axillary blocks versus ultrasound-guided supraclavicular blocks (SMD: 0.52 [-0.14, 1.17]; p = 0.12; I2 = 86.00%); ultrasound-guided axillary blocks versus ultrasound-guided infraclavicular blocks (SMD: 0.21 [-0.49, 0.91]; p = 0.55; I2 = 92.00%). Conclusions: The RA choice should be individualized depending on the patient, procedure, and operator-specific parameters. Compared to ultrasound-guided supraclavicular and infraclavicular block, ultrasound-guided axillary block may be preferred for patients with significant concerns of block-related side effects/complications. High heterogeneity between studies shows the need for more robust RCTs.

Clavicular brachial plexus blocks are a popular method to provide analgesia in upper limb surgery. Two common approaches include the infraclavicular (IC) and supraclavicular (SC) blocks. These two techniques have been compared previously; however, it is still being determined from the current literature whether one should be favoured. A search was performed on the following databases: Ovid Medline, EMBASE and the Web of Science from inception until 30.04.2023. All RCTs comparing SC and IC approaches in upper limb orthopaedic surgery were included. The primary outcome was block success rate. Eighteen RCTs comprising 1389 patients were included. The success rate of IC blocks was higher than SC blocks, odds ratio 0.61 (95% CI 0.41-0.91, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.01). A small number of studies reported on secondary outcomes. A reduced rate of Horner's syndrome was observed in the IC group. Otherwise, no difference was noted between the approaches in terms of procedure time, sensory onset time, patient satisfaction, pain and vascular puncture. IC blocks demonstrate a higher success rate over SC blocks. Across all studies a large variance in outcome reporting and definitions was observed. Future studies should conform to an agreed definition set to facilitate comparison.

L&#x2019;administration pr&#xe9;op&#xe9;ratoire de 0,11&#xa0;mg&#xb7;kg&#x2212;1 de dexam&#xe9;thasone intraveineuse a consid&#xe9;rablement r&#xe9;duit la douleur de rebond dans les 24 heures suivant une chirurgie du poignet et de la main sous bloc du plexus brachial supraclaviculaire. Les r&#xe9;sultats de notre &#xe9;tude soutiennent l&#x2019;utilisation de la dexam&#xe9;thasone intraveineuse comme m&#xe9;thode efficace pour prendre en charge la douleur postop&#xe9;ratoire lors d&#x2019;une chirurgie du poignet et de la main sous bloc supraclaviculaire du plexus brachial. Enregistrement de l&#x2019;&#xe9;tude : www.CRIS.nih.go.kr ( KCT0007208 ); premi&#xe8;re soumission le 5 avril 2022.