TY - JOUR
T1 - Electrical stimulation versus ultrasound guidance for popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter insertion a randomized controlled trial
AU - Mariano, Edward R.
AU - Cheng, Gloria S.
AU - Choy, Lynna P.
AU - Loland, Vanessa J.
AU - Bellars, Richard H.
AU - Sandhu, Navparkash S.
AU - Bishop, Michael L.
AU - Lee, Daniel K.
AU - Maldonado, Rosalita C.
AU - Ilfeld, Brian M.
PY - 2009/9
Y1 - 2009/9
N2 - Background: Sciatic perineural catheters via a popliteal fossa approach and subsequent local anesthetic infusion provide potent analgesia and other benefits after foot and ankle surgery. Electrical stimulation (ES) and, more recently, ultrasound (US)-guided placement techniques have been described. However, because these techniques have not been compared in a randomized fashion, the optimal method remains undetermined. Therefore, we tested the hypotheses that popliteal-sciatic perineural catheters placed via US guidance require less time for placement and produce equivalent results, as compared with catheters placed using ES. Methods: Preoperatively, subjects receiving a popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter for foot and/or ankle surgery were randomly assigned to either the ES with a stimulating catheter or US-guided technique with a nonstimulating catheter. The primary end point was catheter insertion duration (in minutes) starting when the US transducer (US group) or catheter-placement needle (ES group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter-placement needle was removed after catheter insertion. Results: All US-guided catheters were placed per protocol (n = 20), whereas only 80% of stimulation-guided catheters could be placed per protocol (n = 20, P = 0.106). All catheters placed per protocol in both groups resulted in a successful surgical block. Perineural catheters placed by US took a median (10th-90th percentile) of 5.0 min (3.9-11.1 min) compared with 10.0 min (2.0-15.0 min) for stimulation (P = 0.034). Subjects in the US group experienced less pain during catheter placement, scoring discomfort a median of 0 (0.0-2.1) com
AB - Background: Sciatic perineural catheters via a popliteal fossa approach and subsequent local anesthetic infusion provide potent analgesia and other benefits after foot and ankle surgery. Electrical stimulation (ES) and, more recently, ultrasound (US)-guided placement techniques have been described. However, because these techniques have not been compared in a randomized fashion, the optimal method remains undetermined. Therefore, we tested the hypotheses that popliteal-sciatic perineural catheters placed via US guidance require less time for placement and produce equivalent results, as compared with catheters placed using ES. Methods: Preoperatively, subjects receiving a popliteal-sciatic perineural catheter for foot and/or ankle surgery were randomly assigned to either the ES with a stimulating catheter or US-guided technique with a nonstimulating catheter. The primary end point was catheter insertion duration (in minutes) starting when the US transducer (US group) or catheter-placement needle (ES group) first touched the patient and ending when the catheter-placement needle was removed after catheter insertion. Results: All US-guided catheters were placed per protocol (n = 20), whereas only 80% of stimulation-guided catheters could be placed per protocol (n = 20, P = 0.106). All catheters placed per protocol in both groups resulted in a successful surgical block. Perineural catheters placed by US took a median (10th-90th percentile) of 5.0 min (3.9-11.1 min) compared with 10.0 min (2.0-15.0 min) for stimulation (P = 0.034). Subjects in the US group experienced less pain during catheter placement, scoring discomfort a median of 0 (0.0-2.1) com
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=74549193441&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=74549193441&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181ada57a
DO - 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181ada57a
M3 - Article
C2 - 19920423
AN - SCOPUS:74549193441
SN - 1098-7339
VL - 34
SP - 480
EP - 485
JO - Regional anesthesia and pain medicine
JF - Regional anesthesia and pain medicine
IS - 5
ER -