Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2008
Case report: limitation of local anesthetic spread during ultrasound-guided interscalene block. Description of an anatomic variant with clinical correlation.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abrahams Matthew S, Panzer Oliver, Atchabahian Arthur, Horn Jean-Louis, Brown Anthony R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The use of ultrasound (US) for localization of neural structures allows real-time visualization of anatomy; however, variability in the arrangement of structures has been observed. The impact of these variations on the performance and outcome of regional anesthetic techniques remains unclear. We discuss possible anatomic explanations and correlation with clinical observations.
CASE REPORT: We report limited spread of local anesthetic observed during the performance of a US-guided interscalene block. This was associated with an anomalous vessel arising from the subclavian artery, which effectively divided the brachial plexus into 2 compartments. Spread of local anesthetic was restricted to the upper compartment around the C5 through C7 nerve roots. There was no anesthetic fluid visualized in the lower compartment. This produced a block that provided surgical anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy as well as excellent postoperative analgesia, although the medial and distal aspects of the arm remained unaffected.
CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates the ability of US to identify anatomic variations and their relevance to the performance of regional anesthetic techniques.
CASE REPORT: We report limited spread of local anesthetic observed during the performance of a US-guided interscalene block. This was associated with an anomalous vessel arising from the subclavian artery, which effectively divided the brachial plexus into 2 compartments. Spread of local anesthetic was restricted to the upper compartment around the C5 through C7 nerve roots. There was no anesthetic fluid visualized in the lower compartment. This produced a block that provided surgical anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy as well as excellent postoperative analgesia, although the medial and distal aspects of the arm remained unaffected.
CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates the ability of US to identify anatomic variations and their relevance to the performance of regional anesthetic techniques.