• S López-Morales, A Moreno-Martín, J D Leal del Ojo, and F Rodriguez-Huertas.
• Servicio de Anestesiología y Reanimación, Hospital General de Jerez de la Frontera, Jerez de la Frontera, Cádiz, España. sabinalopez@hotmail.com
• Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2013 Jun 1;60(6):313-9.

BackgroundMost upper limb regional anaesthesia techniques are successful, and differences in efficacy should dictate the choice of technique.MethodsThis prospective, randomised study compares ultrasound-guided infraclavicular (IB) and ultrasound-guided axillary brachial plexus blocks (AB) for upper limb surgery. Anaesthesia time (performance time and onset time) was the primary outcome measure. The success rate (surgical anaesthesia), analgesia duration, postoperative pain scores, and the incidence of complications over the following 24h were recorded.ResultsA total of 82 patients were included in the study, and received either IB (n=42) or AB (n=40). No differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of total anaesthesia-related time, performance time, success rate (90-95%), or postoperative pain scores. Compared with the infraclavicular approach, ultrasound-guided AB group required a longer onset time, 10.2min (SD±1.4), than IB group, 6.35min (SD±2). IB was also associated with a longer analgesia duration than that of AB; 20h (SD±1.36) versus 13.70h (SD±2.16), respectively. The only complications we observed were uneventful vascular punctures.ConclusionsWe can conclude that compared to ultrasound-guided AB, ultrasound-guided IB provides a similar efficacy, a shorter onset time and longer lasting analgesia.Copyright © 2012 Sociedad Española de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor. Published by Elsevier España. All rights reserved.

13 keywords...

hide…