• Lucie Beylacq, Elodie Baer, Olivier Choquet, Henri-Louis Dupre, and Xavier Capdevila.
• Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine 3, Victor Segalen University Hospital, Bordeaux, France - lucie.beylacq@yahoo.fr.
• Minerva Anestesiol. 2020 Jan 1; 86 (1): 23-29.

BackgroundUltrasound-guided axillary block is widely used in daily practice for upper limb orthopedic surgery. A simple, safe, efficacious and time-saving technique is mandatory to optimize surgical turnover and costs. In this perspective, we compared, in a randomized, single-blinded study, a standardized perifascial technique and the selective perineural technique.MethodsForty-two patients scheduled for elective hand surgery were randomly assigned to receive 20 mL of 10 mg/mL mepivacaine, either selectively around each of the radial, median, ulnar and musculocutaneous nerves (perineural group) or along the latissimus dorsi and superficial axillary fascia (perifascial group). The primary outcome was the procedure performance time in both groups. Secondary goals were the number of needle passes, a per-procedure evaluation of the performance on a visual analogue scale ranging from 0 to 10, the success rate and the incidence of adverse events.ResultsPerformance time was significantly reduced in the perifascial group (3.6 vs. 6.5 min, P<0.001), with fewer needle passes (3 vs. 6, P<0.001) and a simpler procedure performance (8.5 vs. 7.6, P=0.02). No vascular punctures or neurologic deficits were reported. Surgical anesthesia (95% in both groups) and complete anesthetic success (perifascial 81% vs. perineural 95%) were similar.ConclusionsWe reported that the ultrasound-guided axillary perifascial block is easier to perform and saves procedural time compared to the classic perineural technique. Considering the same anesthetic success rate in both groups, the perifascial plane technique should be considered a daily practice technique and the first level of learning procedure for axillary block.

22 keywords...

hide…