Effects of local anaesthetic dilution on the characteristics of ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block: A randomised controlled study

2Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Aims: Ultrasound guidance has led to marked improvement in the success rate and characteristics of peripheral nerve blocks. However, effects of varying the volume or concentration of a fixed local anaesthetic dose on nerve block remains unclear. The purpose of our study was to evaluate whether at a fixed dose of lidocaine, altering the volume and concentration will have any effect on the onset time of ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block. Material and methods: Twenty patients were randomised to receive an ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus block with either lidocaine 2% with epinephrine (20 ml, Group 2%) or lidocaine 1% with epinephrine (40 ml, Group 1%). The primary endpoint was block onset time. Secondary outcomes included duration of the block, performance time, number of needle passes, incidence of paraesthesia and vascular puncture. Results: The median [IQR] onset time of surgical anaesthesia was shorter in Group 1% when compared to Group 2% (6.25 [5-7.5] min vs 8.75 [7.5-10] min; p=0.03). The mean (SD) overall duration of surgical anaesthesia was significantly shorter in Group 1% compared to Group 2% (150.9±17.2 min vs 165.1±5.9 min; p=0.02). Group 1% had a shorter performance time with fewer needle passes. The incidence of vascular puncture and paraesthesia was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus blocks performed using a higher volume of lower concentration lidocaine was associated with shorter onset time and duration of surgical anaesthesia.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ranganath, A., Ahmed, O., & Iohom, G. (2022). Effects of local anaesthetic dilution on the characteristics of ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block: A randomised controlled study. Medical Ultrasonography, 24(1), 38–43. https://doi.org/10.11152/MU-3069

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free