重复腋臂丛麻醉不同穿刺定位法的效果比较

目的：观察应用不同穿刺定位法施行重复腋路臂丛阻滞麻醉效果，方法：３２４例随机分为两组，在局麻药浓度，容量相同的情况下，Ａ组采用一针穿刺单次给药逐次移位定向挤压法，１６２例中，臂丛阻滞７３０次，Ｂ组采用一针穿刺单次给药，１６２例中，臂丛阻滞６７０次，结果，诱导时间，维持时间和阻滞完全不同，Ａ组均明显优于Ｂ组，结论：臂丛神经处于椎间筋膜及其延续的筋膜间隙中，因此，一针穿刺单次给药能获得有效的阻滞。，     

喙突入路锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞——改良法与经典法的比较

目的 探讨改良(或修正)喙突入路和经典喙突入路定位对锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞的影响.方法 对80例择期行臂丛神经阻滞手术的患者,随机分为2组,采用神经刺激器定位臂丛神经:A组以喙突内下2 cm为穿刺点(经典组);B组穿刺点参考喙突内下2 cm,并用臂丛神经体表的 投影对该穿刺点进行修正(改良组).记录两组患者操作时间、穿刺次数、阻滞成功率、并发症及患者的满意度.结果 改良组的操作时间明显少于经典组(P＜0.01),且改良组无需调整阻滞针即可定位到臂丛神经的比例明显高于经典组(P＜0.05).结论 改良喙突入路可以明显提高单次穿刺定位到神经的概率,且可减少操作时间,提高了穿刺点体表定位的准确性.     

臂丛神经阻滞加用吗啡用于术后止痛的临床观察

我们在臂丛神经阻滞时，于局麻药中试加入少量吗啡用于术后镇痛，兹报告如下。临床资料选择患者６０例，男性４５例，女性１５例，年龄为１７～６７岁。全部用肌间沟法臂丛阻滞，采用双盲法随机分为Ａ、Ｂ两组，Ａ组（ｎ＝３０）注入２％利多卡因、０．５％布比卡因等量混...     

硬膜外阻滞时氯胺酮对剖宫产产妇血流动力学及胎儿血气的影响

本文以正常足月妊娠产妇为对象，观察了在硬膜外阻滞下用氯胺酮对产妇血压，心率及胎儿血气的影响。１６例产妇随机分为二组，Ａ组；在硬膜外阻滞下单次静脉注射氯胺酮１．５ｍｇ／ｋｇ；Ｂ组：仅单次静脉注射氯胺酮１．５ｍｇ／ｋｇ。结果；二组于注氯胺酮后３、１０ｍｉｎ及胎儿娩出前ＭＡＰ、ＨＲ均显著升高，但Ｂ组ＭＡＰ、ＨＲ升高幅度及ＭＡＰ升高持结时间均显著大于Ａ组。     

利多卡因喉上神经阻滞联合环甲膜穿刺气管内给药时的药代动 …

目的：研究利多卡因喉上神经阻滞联合环甲膜穿刺气管内给药时间的药代动力学。方法：８例择期全麻病人（ＡＳＡⅠ￣Ⅱ级）。用２％利多卡因２ｍｇ／ｋｇ行双侧喉上神经阻滞，５％利多卡因２ｍｇ／ｋｇ行环甲膜穿刺气管内给药，操作在１分种内完成。在给药后１、５、１５、２０、２５、３０、６０、１２０和１８０分钟采取颈内静脉血，用荧光偏振免疫法（ＴＤｘＦＬｘ）测定利多卡因血清浓度，用药代动力学计算程序（３ｐ８７）处理。     

肾上腺素对丁哌卡因肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的药效学与药代动…

目的：了解肾上腺素对丁哌卡因肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞的药效学及药动学影响，方法：选择ＡＳＡＩ～Ⅱ级肩部或上肢择期手术患１６例，随机分成两组，试验组与对照组各８例，分别用含或不含肾上腺素的０．７５％丁哌卡因２ｍｇ／ｋｇ行肌间沟臂丛阻滞，对比观察两组的临床效果及药代动力学。结果，与对照组比较，试验组阻滞完善时间及镇痛时间延长（Ｐ〈０．０５或０．０１），试验组与对照组Ｃｍａｘ分别为０．８２９５±０．２８９３     

肌间沟一针两点注射臂丛神经阻滞的效果观察

肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞是上肢手术麻醉常用的方法,但常规的肌间沟臂丛神经阻滞会出现尺侧神经阻滞不完善的情况,作者采用肌间沟一针两点注射的阻滞方法提高了阻滞效果。现报告如下。1资料与方法1.1一般资料:急诊或择期上肢手术行臂丛阻滞200例病人,男118例,女82例;年龄18～44岁,平均31岁;ASAI～II级,均为首次臂丛神经阻滞。将200例病人随机分成A、B两组,每组100例。1.2麻醉方法:A组采用常规的肌间沟法。B组采用肌间沟一针两点注射法。1.2.1常规的肌间沟法:病人平卧,去枕,两肩平放,头转对侧,双臂靠于身侧,消毒铺巾,右手持针于前斜角肌与中斜…     

神经刺激术在超声引导锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞中的应用：一项前瞻性随机研究

超声引导（ultrasound guidance，USG）锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞可提供实时的进针程度和局麻药分布图像。但在USG下行臂丛神经阻滞时，局麻药扩散情况能否取代神经刺激反应作为局麻药的注药指征，目前尚无正式的研究报道。因此，我们进行了此项前瞻性随机研究实验：以72例择期行手和前臂手术的患者作为观察对象，将患者分为单独应用超声引导组（U组）和超声引导与神经刺激联合应用组（S组），比较两组完成神经阻滞操作的时间以及锁骨下阻滞的效果。U组患者采用尽可能少的注药次数注入局麻药，在腋动脉的后方及两侧呈U形分布（其注射次数为1、2和3次的患者数分别为29、6和3例）。S组患者则应用0．3—0．6mA的刺激电流产生远端运动反应之后，行单次注药。注入的麻醉药液为1．5％的利多卡因与0．125％的布比卡因混合液内含1：200000的肾上腺素（最终浓度），药物容量为0．5ml／kg。与S组患者比较，U组患者的阻滞操作时间明显缩短（分别为3．1±1．6分钟及5．2±4．7分钟；P=0．006）。S组患者中，37％的患者局麻药液向腋动脉前方扩散，而63％的患者局麻药液向腋动脉后方扩散。注药后30分钟产生肌皮神经、正中神经、桡神经和尺神经区域完全性感觉阻滞效果的U组患者为86％，而S组患者中仅占57％（P=0．007）。U组患者单次注药与多次注药所产生的完全阻滞率相同，均为86％。U组患者需要追加给药率为8％，而S组为26％（P=0．049）。S组中有1例患者由于20分钟之后仍不能获得远端刺激反应而阻滞失败。由此，我们得出如下结论，在超声引导行锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞时，以观察药液分布情况作为注入局麻药的指征，可缩短操作时间，提高麻醉成功率。局麻药围绕腋动脉的后一侧方向扩散可预示阻滞成功，并免除了直接观察神经的必要。     

垂直锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞两种穿刺点定位方法的比较

目的比较垂直锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞两种定位方法的准确性和安全性。方法择期上肢手术患者110例，ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级，随机分为2组（n=55）：K组采用Kilka介绍的定位方法行垂直锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞，穿刺点位于肩峰腹侧突与胸骨颈静脉切迹连线（K线）的中点；G组采用Greher介绍的定位方法行垂直锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞，根据K线的长度对Kilka定位方法的穿刺点予以校正。所有穿刺成功患者给予0．5％罗哌卡因40ml。记录两种方法的试穿次数、进针深度和注药后正中、桡、尺、腋、肌皮和前臂内侧皮神经阻滞的起效时间，观察有无刺破血管、气胸等并发症。结果K组和G组首次穿刺成功率分别为50．9％和14．5％（P〈0．01），前3次试穿总成功率分别为83．6％和47．3％（P〈0．01），放弃率分别为7．3％和10．9％（P〉0．05）。穿刺成功的100例进针深度平均为35（25—49）mm。K组发生刺破血管2例，G组发生刺破血管1例、局麻药中毒1例。结论就成功率而言，Kilka方法是一种较好的穿刺点定位方法，适用于成年患者垂直锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞，进针深度不超过50mm.     

罗哌卡因混合碳酸利多卡因与等效浓度罗哌卡因用于逆行锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞效果的比较

目的 比较罗哌卡因混合碳酸利多卡因与等效浓度罗哌卡因用于逆行锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞的效果.方法 择期行上肢手术患者60例,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄18～64岁,体重49～ 98 kg,均在超声引导下行逆行锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞.采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为2组(n＝30),A组应用0.35％罗哌卡因30ml,B组应用0.233％罗哌卡因和0.346％碳酸利多卡因混合液30 ml.于麻醉给药后每隔5 min记录臂丛神经各分支的阻滞效果(感觉阻滞效果评估采用针刺法,运动阻滞效果评估采用Bromage分级),记录感觉和运动阻滞起效时间、麻醉给药后30 min时感觉与运动阻滞有效情况和并发症的发生情况.结果 两组臂丛神经各分支的感觉和运动阻滞起效时间及阻滞有效率比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).两组均未见严重并发症发生.结论 罗哌卡因混合碳酸利多卡因与等效浓度罗哌卡因行逆行锁骨下臂丛神经阻滞效果相似,提示碳酸利多卡因不能增强罗哌卡因的臂丛神经阻滞效应.     

Nerve puncture and apparent intraneural injection during ultrasound-guided axillary block does not invariably result in neurologic injury

BACKGROUND: Nerve puncture by the block needle and intraneural injection of local anesthetic are thought to be major risk factors leading to neurologic injury after peripheral nerve blocks. In this study, the author sought to determine the needle-nerve relation and location of the injectate during ultrasound-guided axillary plexus block. METHODS: Using ultrasound-guided axillary plexus block (10-MHz linear transducer, SonoSite, Bothel, WA; 22-gauge B-bevel needle, Becton Dickinson, Franklin Parks, NJ), the incidence of apparent nerve puncture and intraneural injection of local anesthetic was prospectively studied in 26 patients. To determine the onset, success rate, and any residual neurologic deficit, qualitative sensory and quantitative motor testing were performed before and 5 and 20 min after block placement. At a follow-up 6 months after the blocks, the patients were examined for any neurologic deficit. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 26 patients had nerve puncture of at least one nerve, and 21 of 26 patients had intraneural injection of at least one nerve. In the entire cohort, 72 of a total of 104 nerves had intraneural injection. Sensory and motor testing before and 6 months after the nerve injections were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions of this study, puncturing of the peripheral nerves and apparent intraneural injection during axillary plexus block did not lead to a neurologic injury.     

Nerve Puncture and Apparent Intraneural Injection during Ultrasound-guided Axillary Block Does Not Invariably Result in Neurologic Injury

Background: Nerve puncture by the block needle and intraneural injection of local anesthetic are thought to be major risk factors leading to neurologic injury after peripheral nerve blocks. In this study, the author sought to determine the needle-nerve relation and location of the injectate during ultrasound-guided axillary plexus block.

Methods: Using ultrasound-guided axillary plexus block (10-MHz linear transducer, SonoSite, Bothel, WA; 22-gauge B-bevel needle, Becton Dickinson, Franklin Parks, NJ), the incidence of apparent nerve puncture and intraneural injection of local anesthetic was prospectively studied in 26 patients. To determine the onset, success rate, and any residual neurologic deficit, qualitative sensory and quantitative motor testing were performed before and 5 and 20 min after block placement. At a follow-up 6 months after the blocks, the patients were examined for any neurologic deficit.

Results: Twenty-two of 26 patients had nerve puncture of at least one nerve, and 21 of 26 patients had intraneural injection of at least one nerve. In the entire cohort, 72 of a total of 104 nerves had intraneural injection. Sensory and motor testing before and 6 months after the nerve injections were unchanged.     

Case series: Septa can influence local anesthetic spread during infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks

PURPOSE: To ultrasonically identify the presence of septae within the neurovascular sheath and to assess their effect on local anesthetic spread when performing infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks. CLINICAL FEATURES: Thirty ASA status I and II patients scheduled for minor hand surgeries were enrolled in the study. Ultrasound guided infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks were performed on 28 patients. The images of the local anesthetic spread and the effect of the septum within the neurovascular sheath were analyzed. Septae were present in four of six patients where unilateral local anesthetic spread was seen. Septae were not visualized in the 22 patients with unrestricted local anesthetic spread after the initial injection. All 28 patients underwent their planned operations successfully with adequate anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the presence of septae within the neurovascular sheath may influence the pattern of local anesthetic spread associated with the infraclavicular approach to brachial plexus blocks.     

Comparison of continuous 3-in-1 and fascia Iliaca compartment blocks for postoperative analgesia: feasibility,catheter migration,distribution of sensory block,and analgesic efficacy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Efficacy and technical aspects of continuous 3-in-1 and fascia iliaca compartment blocks were compared. METHODS: Forty-four patients scheduled for cruciate ligament repair or femur surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups. After surgery with the patient anesthetized, catheters were placed for continuous 3-in-1 blocks by means of a nerve stimulator (group 1). In group 2, the catheter was inserted for continuous fascia iliaca compartment block without the use of a nerve stimulator. In both groups, a 5-mg/kg bolus of 0.5% ropivacaine was administered followed by continuous infusion of 0.1 mL/kg/h of 0.2% ropivacaine for 48 hours. In the postoperative period, all the patients received parenteral propacetamol (6 g daily) and ketoprofen (200 mg daily) and 0.1 mg/kg of subcutaneous morphine as rescue analgesia if the visual analog scale (VAS) pain values were greater than 30 mm. We evaluated the technical difficulties relative to catheter placement, the location of the catheter, the analgesic efficacy, and the distribution of the sensory block at 1 hour, 24 hours, and 48 hours. RESULTS: Catheter placement was faster in group 2, and the absence of nerve stimulation decreased material costs (P <.05). No significant difference was observed between groups concerning location of the catheter tip under the fascia iliaca. In both groups, the distribution of the sensory block and its course were similar except for those of the obturator nerve (more sensory blocks in group 1, P <.05). No significant difference was noted between the groups regarding median VAS pain values and consumption of morphine during the 48-hour period. No major side effect was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that a catheter for continuous lumbar plexus block can be placed more quickly and at lesser cost using the fascia iliaca technique than the perivascular technique with equivalent postoperative analgesic efficacy.     

Ultrasound-guided supraclavicular vs infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks in children

Background: Supraclavicular brachial plexus blocks are not common in children because of risk of pneumothorax. However, infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks have been described in paediatric patients both with nerve stimulation and ultrasound (US)‐guidance. US‐guidance reduces the risk of complications in supraclavicular brachial plexus blocks in adults. Objective: To compare the success rate, complications and time of performance of US‐guided supraclavicular vs infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks in children. Material and methods: Eighty children, 5–15 years old, scheduled for upper limb surgery were divided into two randomized groups: group S (supraclavicular), n = 40, and group I (infraclavicular), n = 40. All blocks performed were exclusively US‐guided, by a senior anaesthesiologist with at least 6 months of experience in US‐guided blocks. For supraclavicular blocks the probe was placed in coronal‐oblique‐plane in the supraclavicular fossa and the puncture was in‐plane (IP) from lateral to medial. For infraclavicular blocks the probe was placed parallel and below the clavicle and the puncture was out‐of‐plane. Ropivacaine 0.5% was administered up to a maximum of 0.5 ml·kg^?1 until appropriate US‐guided‐spread was achieved. Block duration and volumes of ropivacaine used (mean±1SD) in the supraclavicular approach were recorded. Success rate (mean ± 1 SD, 95%confidence interval), complications rate and time to perform the block (two‐tailed Student′s test) were recorded both for supraclavicular and infraclavicular approaches. Results: In the US‐guided supraclavicular brachial plexus blocks, the duration of the sensory block was 6.5 ± 2 h and of the motor block was 4 ± 1 h. The volume of ropivacaine used in this group was 6 ± 2 ml. In group I, 88% of blocks achieved surgical anaesthesia without any supplemental analgesia compared with 95% in group S (P = 0.39; difference=7%; 95% CI: ?10% to 24%). Failures in group I were because of arterial puncture and insufficient ulnar or radial sensory block. Failures in group S were because of insufficient ulnar sensory block. No pneumothorax or Horner’s syndrome was recorded in either group. The mean time (SD) to perform the block was in group I: 13 min (range 5–16) and in group S: 9 min (range 7–12); the 95% CI for this difference was 2–6 min and was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusions: (i) Ultrasound‐guided supraclavicular and infraclavicular brachial plexus blocks are effective in children. (ii) There has been no pneumothorax in 40 US‐guided supraclavicular brachial plexus blocks performed by anaesthesiologists already trained in US‐guided regional anaesthesia using an IP technique in children ≥5 years old. (iii) In this study, the supraclavicular approach of the brachial plexus was faster to perform than the infraclavicular one.     

Distribution of local anesthetic in axillary brachial plexus block: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study

BACKGROUND: There is an unsettled discussion about whether the distribution of local anesthetic is free or inhibited when performing brachial plexus blocks. This is the first study to use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to help answer this question. METHODS: Thirteen patients received axillary block by a catheter-nerve stimulator technique. After locating the median nerve, a total dose of 50 ml local anesthetic was injected via the catheter in four divided doses of 1, 4, 15, and 30 ml. Results of sensory and motor testing were compared with the spread of local anesthetic as seen by MRI scans taken after each dose. The distribution of local anesthetic was described with reference to a 20-mm diameter circle around the artery. RESULTS: Thirty minutes after the last dose, only two patients demonstrated analgesia or anesthesia in the areas of the radial, median, and ulnar nerve. At that time, eight of the patients had incomplete spread of local anesthetic around the artery, as seen by MRI. Their blocks were significantly poorer than those of the five patients with complete filling of the circle, although incomplete blocks were also present in the latter group. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that MRI is useful in examining local anesthetic distribution in axillary blocks because it can show the correlation between MRI distribution pattern and clinical effect. The cross-sectional spread of fluid around the brachial-axillary artery was often incomplete-inhibited, and the clinical effect often inadequate.     

Interscalene brachial plexus block with a continuous catheter insertion system and a disposable infusion pump

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus blockade traditionally requires a hospital stay for local anesthetic infusion, and achieving consistent catheter insertion may be difficult. Incorporating long-acting pain relief from a continuous peripheral nerve block, with a reliable method of catheter insertion, and a self-contained infusion system would be a valuable asset for short-stay care. We compared the efficacy of single injection interscalene brachial plexus blockade to a continuous peripheral nerve block, with an insulated Tuohy system and a disposable infusion pump. Forty adult patients scheduled for open rotator cuff repair were entered in this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. Patients received an interscalene brachial plexus blockade and a continuous peripheral nerve catheter as their primary anesthetic and then, were assigned to receive one of two different postoperative infusions: either 0.2% ropivacaine at 10 mL/h via a disposable infusion pump or normal saline at 10 mL/h via a disposable infusion pump (n = 18-20 per group). Visual analog pain scores and postoperative morphine consumption were measured for 24 h. The ropivacaine group showed less pain than the placebo group (P: = 0.0001) between 12 and 24 h after the initial injection of local anesthetic. In addition, initial interscalene blockade was successful in all patients and all redosed catheters were functional after 24 h with the continuous catheter insertion system. We conclude that it is possible to achieve a high rate of successful catheter placement and analgesia by using the continuous catheter insertion system and a disposable infusion pump in the ambulatory setting. This method of analgesia may offer improved pain relief after outpatient rotator cuff repair.     

三种定位方法行臂丛神经阻滞的效果比较

目的探讨三种定位方法行臂丛神经阻滞的效果。方法选择择期上肢手术患者120例,随机均分成三组:超声引导组(A组)、神经刺激器组(B组)、传统方法组(C组),局麻药为2%盐酸氯普鲁卡因30ml。记录肌皮神经、桡神经、正中神经、尺神经阻滞的起效时间,并评价其阻滞完善率;评定麻醉效果(优、良、差),记录并发症。结果 A组神经阻滞起效时间较短,而C组起效时间较长,A组和B组明显短于C组,且A组短于B组(P<0.01)。A组神经阻滞完善率均接近100%,明显高于B组和C组(P<0.05或P<0.01)。麻醉效果优等率A组为95%,B组为75%,C组为47.5%,A组明显高于B、C组(P<0.05或P<0.01)。A、B组各有1例,C组有3例并发症,但三组均未出现严重并发症。结论超声引导下臂丛神经阻滞较神经刺激器辅助和传统方法下的阻滞效果良好,起效时间更短,提高了麻醉安全性和有效性。     

Addition of fentanyl to bupivacaine prolongs anesthesia and analgesia in axillary brachial plexus block

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the analgesic and anesthetic effects of 40 mL bupivacaine 0.25%, 40 mL bupivacaine 0.25% plus fentanyl 2.5 microg/mL, and 40 mL bupivacaine 0.125% plus fentanyl 2.5 microg/mL for axillary brachial plexus block. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly allocated to 3 groups and received axillary brachial plexus block with 40 mL bupivacaine 0.25% (group B), 40 mL bupivacaine 0.25% with fentanyl 2.5 microg/mL (group BF), or 40 mL bupivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2.5 microg/mL (group DBF). The onset times and the duration of sensory and motor blocks, duration of analgesia, hemodynamic parameters, and adverse events were noted. RESULTS: The mean duration of sensory block and analgesia were longer in group BF (10.1 hours and 20.9 hours) than group B (6.9 hours and 11.6 hours) and DBF (5.9 hours and 12.0 hours) (P < .01, P < .001, respectively). The mean duration of motor block was also longer in group BF (10.7 hours) than group B (4.9 hours) (P < .01). Only 2 patients experienced motor block in group DBF. The frequency of successful block was 35% in group DBF (P < .01). Hemodynamic parameters were similar in all groups. In group B, only 1 patient experienced dizziness. Nausea was observed in 1 patient in each fentanyl group. CONCLUSION: The addition of 100 microg/mL fentanyl to 0.25% bupivacaine almost doubles the duration of analgesia following axillary brachial plexus block when compared with 0.25% bupivacaine alone.     

热敷法缓解静脉滴注极化液疼痛的观察

目的观察热敷法对静脉滴注极化液所致疼痛的疗效。方法将160例患者随机分为4 组,每组40 例,在输注极化液过程中,采用不热敷(O组)、穿刺点周围热敷(A组)、穿刺点近心端10 cm热敷(B组)和加热输液管下段近穿刺部位(C组)措施,观察其疼痛发生率的变化及输液时间。结果4 组疼痛发生率比较,差异有显著性意义(P<0 .01);O组与A组、B组、C组比较,A组与C组比较,B组与C组比较,差异均有显著性意义(P<0.05,P<0.01);A组与B组比较,差异无显著性意义(P> 0. 05)。输液时间比较,各组间差异均有显著性意义(P< 0. 05,P<0 .01)。结论热敷疗法可以使患者的疼痛发生率明显降低,并可显著减少输液时间,其中加热输液管下段的方法最为有效。