alexa Should we stop doing blind transversus abdominis plane blocks?
Psychiatry

Psychiatry

Journal of Addiction Research & Therapy

Author(s): McDermott G, Korba E, Mata U, Jaigirdar M, Narayanan N,

Abstract Share this page

Abstract BACKGROUND: Any landmark-based regional anaesthetic technique raises two important issues. The first is the accuracy of placement of the needle and thus the local anaesthetic in a 'blind' technique and the second is the potential for damage to adjacent structures. We designed a prospective, blinded study in an adult general surgical population to evaluate with ultrasound the placement of the needle tip and local anaesthetic during transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks using the landmark-based 'double-pop' technique. METHODS: After induction of general anaesthesia, 36 adult patients had a TAP block performed bilaterally using the standard landmark-based technique. Ultrasonography was then used to record the actual needle position and local anaesthetic spread. The anaesthetist performing the block was blinded to the ultrasound images. RESULTS: Thirty-six adult patients were included in the study, which was terminated early due to what was considered an unacceptably high level of peritoneal needle placements. The needle tip and local anaesthetic spread were in the correct plane in only 17 (23.6\%) of the injections. In the remaining 55 (76.4\%), the needle was in the subcutaneous tissue 1 (1.38\%), external oblique muscle 1 (1.38\%), plane between the external and internal oblique muscles 5 (6.94\%), internal oblique muscle 26 (36.1\%), transversus abdominis muscle 9 (12.5\%), and peritoneum 13 (18\%). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the needle and local anaesthetic placement using the standard landmark-based approach to the TAP block is inaccurate, and the incidence of peritoneal placement is unacceptably high. This article was published in Br J Anaesth and referenced in Journal of Addiction Research & Therapy

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Relevant Topics

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