• Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim · Nov 2004

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial

    [Comparison of 4 techniques for internal saphenous nerve block].

    • M Taboada, D Lorenzo, J Oliveira, B Bascuas, J Pérez, J Rodríguez, J Cortés, and J Alvarez.
    • Servicio de Anestesia, Reanimación y Terapia del Dolor, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago de Compostela, Travesía da Choupana s/n, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, La Coruña. manutabo@mixmail.com
    • Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2004 Nov 1;51(9):509-14.

    ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of 4 techniques for internal saphenous nerve block with 10 mL of 1.5% mepivacaine.MethodsEighty ASA I-II patients scheduled for foot (hallux valgus) surgery with combined sciatic and saphenous nerve blocks were randomized to receive the saphenous nerve block by one of the following techniques: a paravenous approach (n = 20), a transsartorial approach (n = 20), a femoral nerve approach in the inguinal region using a nerve stimulator (n = 20), and by subcutaneous infiltration between the tibial tuberosity and the internal gastrocnemius muscle (n = 20). A pressure cuff was placed 10 cm below the knee of all patients. Success was assessed by pin prick inside the ankle 30 minutes after initiation of the block. Tolerance of the pressure cuff and discomfort during performance of the technique were also assessed.ResultsThe 4 groups were similar as to distribution of males and females and mean weight, age, and height. Blocking the saphenous nerve by way of the femoral nerve in the inguinal region was the most effective approach (success in 95% of patients), significantly better than the other 3 techniques (P < 0.05). The paravenous approach was successful in 60% of cases, the transsartorial approach in 50%, and the subcutaneous infiltration technique in 45%. The pressure cuff was well tolerated by all patients (100%) in whom the femoral nerve approach was used. The cuff was tolerated by 70% in the paravenous approach group, by 65% in the transsartorial approach group, and by 60% in the subcutaneous infiltration group. Patients reported more discomfort during initiation of the blockade in the paravenous approach and subcutaneous infiltration groups than in the femoral nerve or transsartorial approach groups (P < 0.05).ConclusionThe femoral nerve approach in the inguinal region, with nerve stimulator, to block the internal saphenous nerve led to a larger number of successful blocks than did the paravenous or transsartorial approaches, or the technique of subcutaneous infiltration between the tibial tuberosity and internal gastrocnemius muscle.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…