2020, Vol. 3, Issue 1, Part A
A randomized controlled study comparing supraclavicular brachial plexus block under guidance of ultrasound and peripheral nerve stimulator
Author(s): Urvashi Yadav, Dheer Singh and Mohammad Shakir
Abstract: Background and Aim: The supraclavicular approach is the easiest and most effective approach to for upper limb anaesthesia. We conducted this study to compare USG with PNS in terms of onset and duration of motor and sensory blockade, procedure time, and complications if any.
Study Design: Prospective, randomised, double blind study.
Methodology: Sixty patients over the age of 18 years scheduled for elective upper limb surgery were randomly allocated into two groups. In Group A, under ultrasound guidance, patients got supraclavicular brachial plexus block and PNS was used in Group B patients. As local anaesthetic 25 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine was used in both the groups. Procedure time, onset and duration of sensory and motor block, success rate and complications were accessed.
Results: Mean procedure time was shorter with USG (5.59±1.01min) compared to PNS (8.77±1.47). The mean onset of sensory block (4.97±0.73 min vs. 7.12±0.86 min) and motor block (7.21±0.77 min vs. 9.42±1.06 min) were considerably shorter in Group A compared to Group B. The mean duration of sensory (294.90±9.79min vs. 257.12±17.86 min) and motor block (270.21±10.69 vs 235.81±16.16) was significantly prolonged in Group A compared to Group B. Eight patients in group B and one patient in Group A had a vascular puncture identified on aspiration.
Conclusion: We conclude that USG is a safe and effective technique for supraclavicular block in terms of quality and duration with less complications compared to PNS.
Pages: 43-47 | Views: 1657 | Downloads: 830
Download Full Article: Click Here
How to cite this article:
Urvashi Yadav, Dheer Singh, Mohammad Shakir. A randomized controlled study comparing supraclavicular brachial plexus block under guidance of ultrasound and peripheral nerve stimulator. Int J Med Anesthesiology 2020;3(1):43-47. DOI: 10.33545/26643766.2020.v3.i1a.69