The effect of stimulating versus nonstimulating catheters for continuous interscalene plexus blocks in short-term pain management

Birnbaum, Jürgen; Kip, Miriam; Spies, Claudia; Hein, Ortrud Vargas; Labs, K.; Moeckel, Gregor; Volk, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2007.03.006

Cited by 21 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although catheter localization techniques include PNS, 200 UGRA,193,201 and the use of stimulating catheters, the optimal method is unknown. Arguably, the limited data on stimulating versus nonstimulating brachial plexus catheters 202,203 have taken on less importance as more catheters are placed under the direct ultrasonic visualization. 204 Dosing strategies for continuous upper extremity blockade likely vary by approach to the brachial plexus.…”

Section: Continuous Perineural Catheter Blocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper Extremity Regional Anesthesia

Neal¹,

Gerancher

Hebl

et al. 2009

Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine

310

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brachial plexus blockade is the cornerstone of the peripheral nerve regional anesthesia practice of most anesthesiologists. As part of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's commitment to providing intensive evidence-based education related to regional anesthesia and analgesia, this article is a complete update of our 2002 comprehensive review of upper extremity anesthesia. The text of the review focuses on (1) pertinent anatomy, (2) approaches to the brachial plexus and techniques that optimize block quality, (4) local anesthetic and adjuvant pharmacology, (5) complications, (6) perioperative issues, and (6) challenges for future research.Upper extremity regional anesthesia has been a mainstay of the anesthesiologist's armamentarium since Hall 1 first reported the use of cocaine to block the brachial plexus in 1884. Recognizing that upper extremity neural blockade represents the most frequent use of peripheral nerve blocks in most anesthesiologists' practice, 2 in 2001, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) undertook a critical review of all available English-language publications pertinent to this topic. The resulting extensive source document was synthesized into a comprehensive review article 3 that was published in 2002; both the source and the review documents will be updated approximately every 5 years.Rather than publishing only new material that has become available since 2002, the original review article has been completely revised so that readers may continue to view the subject matter in its entirety. New topics in this review include ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block, continuous catheter-based analgesia, and a collection of new images * by medical illustrator, Jennifer Gentry (www.gentryvisualization.com). This review summarizes the essential scholarly work available from the source document, which can be viewed at Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Address correspondence to: Joseph M. Neal, MD, 1100 Ninth Ave (B2-AN), Seattle, WA 98101 (anejmn@vmmc.org). The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of this entity. James P. Rathmell, MD, served as acting editor-in-chief for this article.Financial support: None. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptReg Anesth Pain Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2010 March 1. Published in final edited form as:Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009 ; 34(2): 134-170. doi:10.1097/AAP.0b013e31819624eb. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript www.asra.com. This review article strives (1) to serve as a review of pertinent anatomy, (2) to compare the effectiveness of brachial plexus approaches and techniques, (3) to present available evidence to guide selection of pharmacological agents, (4) to describe the complications inherent to upper extremity anesthesia, (5) to consider pertinent perioperative issues, and (6) to identify informational gaps and empha...

show abstract

Section: Continuous Perineural Catheter Blocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upper Extremity Regional Anesthesia

Neal¹,

Gerancher

Hebl

et al. 2009

Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine

310

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Traditional postoperative pain management, such as patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), can cause fluctuating pain levels with inconsistent relief and, commonly, side effects such as nausea 1. With advances in nerve-stimulating needles and ultrasound imaging technology, FNB has become more common and reproducible 2. In addition, its unilateral nature makes FNB appealing for knee replacement patients, as the contralateral limb can be used for mobilisation assistance early in the postoperative period.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review: femoral nerve block may be the most effective option for pain relief following total knee replacement

Krych

Pagnano

2014

Evid Based Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implications for practice and research: Utilisation of continuous femoral nerve blockade (FNB) following knee replacement surgery can provide superior pain relief and fewer side effects, compared to traditional patient-controlled opioid analgesia. Further research is needed to compare the effectiveness of FNB to other pain management strategies, such as local anaesthetic infiltration and multimodal oral pain medication.

show abstract

“…Stimulating catheters placed at both the sciatic nerve and brachial plexus have shown superior results. 41,[46][47][48][49] In addition, a number of trials have shown a reduction in rescue medication associated with stimulating catheters in the intraoperative and postoperative period. 41,[48][49][50][51][52][53] One study considered motor and sensory block adequate for surgery and again found a significant 60% absolute improvement in the stimulating catheter group.…”

Section: Use Of the Stimulating Cathetermentioning

confidence: 99%