Nerve Stimulator ONLY Blocks are Safe

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

BLADEMDA

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
15+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
22,664
Reaction score
9,752
Anesthesiology:
September 2011 - Volume 115 - Issue 3 - p 589–595
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182276d10
Pain Medicine

No Clinical or Electrophysiologic Evidence of Nerve Injury after Intraneural Injection during Sciatic Popliteal Block

Sala-Blanch, Xavier M.D.*; López, Ana M. M.D., Ph.D.*; Pomés, Jaume M.D.†; Valls-Sole, Josep M.D., Ph.D.‡; García, Ana I. M.D.†; Hadzic, Admir M.D., Ph.D.§
http://journals.lww.com/anesthesiol...al_or_Electrophysiologic_Evidence_of.25.aspx#



Background: Intraneural injection during nerve-stimulator–guided sciatic block at the popliteal fossa may be a common occurrence. Although intraneural injections have not resulted in clinically detectable neurologic injury in small studies in human subjects, intraneural injections result in postinjection inflammation in animal models. This study used clinical, imaging, and electrophysiologic measures to evaluate the occurrence of any subclinical neurologic injury in patients with intraneural injection during sciatic popliteal block.
Methods: Twenty patients undergoing popliteal block were enrolled; 17 patients completed the study protocol. After tibial nerve response was achieved by nerve stimulation (0.3–0.5 mA; 2 Hz; 0.1 ms), 20 ml mixture of mepivacaine (1.25%) and radiopaque contrast (2 ml) were injected. Location and spread of the injectant were assessed by ultrasound measurements of the sciatic nerve area before and after injection, and by computed tomography. In addition to clinical neurologic evaluations, serial electrophysiologic studies (nerve conduction and late response studies using predefined criteria) were performed at baseline and at 1 week and 3 weeks after the block for signs of subclinical neurologic dysfunction.
Results: Sixteen injections (94%, 95% CI: 71&#8211;100%) met criteria for an intraneural injection. Postinjection nerve area on ultrasound increased by 45% (95% CI: 29&#8211;58%), P < 0.001. Computed tomography demonstrated fascicular separation in 70% (95% CI: 44&#8211;90%), air within the nerve in 29% (95% CI: 10&#8211;56%), contrast along bifurcations in 65% (95% CI: 38&#8211;86%), and concentric contrast layers in 100% (95% CI: 84&#8211;100%). Neither clinical nor electrophysiologic studies detected neurologic dysfunction indicating injury to the nerve.
Conclusions: Nerve-stimulator&#8211;guided sciatic block at the popliteal fossa often results in intraneural injection that may not lead to clinical or electrophysiologic nerve injury.
 
The point of this thread is the following:

If all you have at your ASC is a $300 1996 Braun Stimuplex purchaed on E-bay then there isn't a need for concern about safety. Go ahead and Block your patients using the decades old "nerve stimulator/landmark approach" without the $40,000 Ultrasound machine.

DO NOT drop your guard as it concerns intraneural or intravascular injection. If anything, make sure you don't inject with high pressures, stimulator reading less than 0.2 (controversial here some use 0.5 in higher risk groups) or complaint of severe pain.
 
If we accept the notion of equivalence between UGRA and traditional NS techniques, we would argue that equivalence is actually a victory for US. US has rejuvenated regional anesthesia, objectified much of the art, and recruited a new generation of practitioners serving to expand the practice of regional anesthesia. Thus, if peripheral regional anesthesia is now being offered where once it was not, and with a quality equivalent to experts publishing their nerve stimulator data, then the community as a whole has won. Patients will now be able to reap the benefits of regional anesthesia that we all hold as sacrosanct. Given the popular expansion of UGRA in recent years and our own anecdotal experience, it is our contention that regional anesthesia is now practiced by individuals who originally rejected regional techniques when they were based on anatomical assumptions without image guidance. In the process of expanding our regional anesthesia services, it will be incumbent on our community to contribute to large multicenter clinical registries designed to analyze and assess the impact of our practices and beliefs.




Equivalence Is Victory

Editorial from A and A Sept. 2011
 
Anesthesiology:
September 2011 - Volume 115 - Issue 3 - p 596–603
doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318221fca8
Pain Medicine

Nerve Stimulator-guided Supplemental Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block after a Failed Sciatic Block Does Not Increase the Incidence of Transient Postoperative Neurologic Sequelae

Nader, Antoun M.D.*; Kendall, Mark C. M.D.†; Doty, Robert Jr M.D.‡; DeLeon, Alexander M.D.§; Yaghmour, Edward M.D.&#8214;; Kelikian, Armen S. M.D.#; McCarthy, Robert J. Pharm.D.**






Abstract

Background: Supplemental peripheral nerve blocks are not commonly performed in adults because of concerns of cumulative exposure of the nerve to the local anesthetic as well as increased ischemia from epinephrine. The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of postoperative neurologic symptoms after a failed subgluteal sciatic nerve block and a supplemental popliteal sciatic nerve block.
Methods: Five hundred twelve adult patients undergoing ambulatory surgery were prospectively studied (1 yr). Sciatic nerve blocks were performed using levobupivacaine 0.625% with epinephrine 1:200,000 (0.5 ml/kg). Patients who failed to achieve sensory and motor anesthesia at 30–60 min were given a popliteal sciatic nerve block (lidocaine 2% 10 ml + levobupivacaine 0.5% 10 ml). Subjects were contacted at 24 h to 48 h, 2 weeks, and 1 month. Symptomatic patients were contacted biweekly and reevaluated during follow-up surgeon visits until symptom resolution.
Results: Four hundred thirty-nine subjects were analyzed. Fifty-six received a popliteal sciatic nerve block. Four subjects (0.9%) had self-reported neurologic symptoms in the distribution of the sciatic nerve. Investigator-initiated follow-up revealed 33 subjects (8.7%) who received a single subgluteal sciatic block and 4 subjects (7.1%) after a supplemental sciatic nerve block with neurologic symptoms (P = 0.80). The median duration of symptoms was 4 weeks (95% CI 3–5) in the subgluteal and 4 weeks (95% CI 3–5) weeks in the popliteal group (P = 0.98). All symptoms resolved by 14 weeks postprocedure.
Conclusion: Blocking the sciatic nerve at a more distal site after a failed subgluteal sciatic nerve block does not appear to influence the incidence or duration
 
The point of this thread is the following:

If all you have at your ASC is a $300 1996 Braun Stimuplex purchaed on E-bay then there isn't a need for concern about safety. Go ahead and Block your patients using the decades old "nerve stimulator/landmark approach" without the $40,000 Ultrasound machine.

DO NOT drop your guard as it concerns intraneural or intravascular injection. If anything, make sure you don't inject with high pressures, stimulator reading less than 0.2 (controversial here some use 0.5 in higher risk groups) or complaint of severe pain.

A nerve stimulator costs $300? That seems steep to me - - I had no idea. It's a battery with an adjustable switch and probably has a chip somewhere.
 
A nerve stimulator costs $300? That seems steep to me - - I had no idea. It's a battery with an adjustable switch and probably has a chip somewhere.

Doesn't $40k for an US seem a little steep as well?

We are headed for a healthcare crisis and the gov't is attacking physician income as a high priority item. But I haven't heard any real talk about medical supplies and their costs.
 
B BRAUN STIMUPLEX NERVE STIMULATOR PRODUCTS # 4892098 - STIMUPLEX HNS12 Nerve Stimulator w/ SENSe, Four-Pin Electrode Connecting Cable, 9V Battery, Testing Resistor and Operation Manual in Carrying Case, 1/cs

Price:
$1,436.85

We bought one of those exact stims last year for under $500


B Braun is making a killing. Let's start our own nerve stimulator company Blade. I swear those things can't cost more than 25$ to make.

$25 for parts, $300 to the lawyers, damn their oily hides.
 
B BRAUN STIMUPLEX NERVE STIMULATOR PRODUCTS # 4892098 - STIMUPLEX HNS12 Nerve Stimulator w/ SENSe, Four-Pin Electrode Connecting Cable, 9V Battery, Testing Resistor and Operation Manual in Carrying Case, 1/cs








Price:
$1,436.85

SKU:
10217939

Brand:
B Braun Medical

Availability:
Stock Item

Shipping:
FREE on orders over $100*




Quantity:

We were handled out these during residency.
 
We are headed for a healthcare crisis and the gov't is attacking physician income as a high priority item. But I haven't heard any real talk about medical supplies and their costs.

Unfortunately technology is a beast that keeps on driving costs up. Everybody wants the biggest, best and newest.
 
Unfortunately technology is a beast that keeps on driving costs up. Everybody wants the biggest, best and newest.

But they also want it for free.

That, to me, is the crux of healthcare costs.

If people knew how much the $hit they demand costs, and paid for it, they would either
a) demand less $hit, or
b) go bankrupt.
 
Top