alexa A comparison of two techniques for ultrasound guided infraclavicular block.
Anesthesiology

Anesthesiology

Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research

Author(s): Bigeleisen P, Wilson M

Abstract Share this page

Abstract BACKGROUND: There is some debate about the proper site and arm position and the direction of the needle for the performance of ultrasound guided infraclavicular block. METHODS: Using ultrasound, we compared the ease and success rate of a medial or a lateral approach to the brachial plexus for performing infraclavicular block in two groups of patients (n=202). The proximity of the needle to the lung in each group was also measured with and without the arm abducted from the side. RESULTS: The medial approach was quicker to perform compared with the lateral approach (9 min vs 13 min). The medial approach also had a faster onset. On average, the three cords were more readily imaged with the medial technique (92\%) compared with the lateral technique (82\%) and the medial technique prevented tourniquet pain more reliably (97\%) vs the lateral technique (83\%). In the medial technique, the plexus was also closer to the skin (3.7 cm) compared with the lateral technique (4.5 cm). The lateral approach more frequently avoided the chest wall (49\%) compared with the medial technique (35\%) but resulted in more frequent vascular puncture. Both approaches provided good anesthesia at the surgical site. Abducting the arm 110 degrees and externally rotating the shoulder moves the plexus away from the thorax and closer to the surface of the skin. CONCLUSION: For infraclavicular block using ultrasound guidance the medial approach is faster and easier to perform, has lower incidence of tourniquet pain and vascular puncture, and brings the plexus closer to the skin. We recommend abducting the arm 110 degrees to minimize the risk of pneumothorax. Externally rotating the shoulder also brings the plexus closer to the skin. This article was published in Br J Anaesth and referenced in Journal of Anesthesia & Clinical Research

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri, Food, Aqua and Veterinary Science Journals

Dr. Krish

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Clinical and Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Earth & Environmental Sciences

Katie Wilson

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science and Health care Journals

Andrea Jason

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics and Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Informatics Journals

Stephanie Skinner

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Material Sciences Journals

Rachle Green

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Mathematics and Physics Journals

Jim Willison

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

John Behannon

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

[email protected]

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords