• P Szmuk, T Ezri, H Ben Hur, B Caspi, L Priscu, and V Priscu.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Kaplan Hospital, Rehovot, Israel.
• Can J Anaesth. 1994 Dec 1;41(12):1181-4.

AbstractPenile block (PB) in adults is not a well-recognized technique. The aim of this study was to compare, in a randomized prospective manner, five different techniques of PB in 250 adults undergoing circumcision with regard to anaesthetic quality, complications and postoperative analgesia. Patients were divided into five groups (50 per group) according to the technique used: Group A--"10, 30-13, 30" approach; Group B--the subpubic approach; Group C--subcutaneous ring block; Group D--a combination of frenulum infiltration and the "10, 30-13, 30" approach; Group E--a combination of frenulum infiltration and the subpubic approach. The number of failed blocks in Groups A and B (41 and 43 respectively) was greater than in Groups C, D and E (2, 3 and 5 respectively) (P < 0.001). The five groups did not differ with regard to adverse effects or time until the onset of postoperative pain when the blocks were successful. It is concluded that good surgical anaesthesia, a low rate of adverse effects and prolonged postoperative analgesia can be achieved by the use of either subcutaneous ring block or a combination of dorsal nerve block (using the "10, 30-13, 30" or the subpubic approach) and infiltration of the frenulum. These approaches to the PB are effective anaesthetic techniques for circumcision in adults.

35 keywords...

hide…