PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12116830

Single injection digital block: comparison between three techniques.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Regional anesthesia of a single finger is commonly achieved by the traditional ring block. The major drawback of this technique is the need for at least two painful injections in the digit. Single injection techniques have been described. A comparison of their results could help health professionals select the most appropriate technique. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective randomized study was designed to compare three techniques in term of patient tolerance, distribution of anesthesia and efficiency: the modified transthecal digital block, the subcutaneous digital block and a combination of the two. Digits were randomized in three groups (n = 30). Blocks were performed by a single investigator. A visual analogic scale was used to evaluate pain associated with the injection. Prick-testing was used to evaluate anesthesia at the volar and dorsal aspects of the phalanxes. Statistical analysis of the results was performed. RESULTS: All techniques allowed surgery to be performed without complementary injection most of the time (25/30). The dorsum of the proximal phalanx, however, was unpredictably included in the anesthetized territory. The highest rate of full digital block was achieved with the combined technique. DISCUSSION: The least invasive of equally effective techniques should be considered as the first choice. The subcutaneous single injection digital block is safe, efficient and easy to perform. It allows treatment of all conditions on the volar aspect of the finger and on the dorsal aspect of the distal and middle phalanxes. For surgery on the dorsal aspect of the proximal phalanx, a supplementary dorsal block should be used.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J P Brutus, Y Baeten, N Chahidi, L Kinnen, P Ledoux, J P Moermans. 2002. Single injection digital block: comparison between three techniques.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1297-3203(02)00107-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Regional (spinal, epidural, caudal) versus general anaesthesia in preterm infants undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy in early infancy.

BACKGROUND: With improvements in neonatal intensive care, more premature infants are surviving the neonatal period. With this increase, more are presenting for surgery in early infancy. Of predominance in this period is the repair of inguinal herniae, appearing in 38% of infants whose birth weight is between 751g and 1000g. Most postoperative studies show that approximately 20% to 30% of otherwise healthy former preterm infants having inguinal herniorrhaphy under general anaesthesia have one or more apnoeas in the postoperative period. Regional anaesthesia might reduce postoperative apnoea in this population. OBJECTIVES: To determine if regional anaesthesia, in preterm infants undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy, reduces post-operative apnoea, bradycardia, and the use of assisted ventilation, in comparison to those infants undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy with general anaesthesia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials were identified by searching MEDLINE (1966-Nov 2002), EMBASE (1982-Nov 2002), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2002), reference lists of published trials and abstracts published in Pediatric Research. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of spinal versus general anaesthesia in preterm infants undergoing inguinal herniorrhaphy in early infancy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted and the analyses performed independently by two reviewers. Authors of each eligible study were contacted for missing data. Studies were analysed for methodologic quality using the criteria of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. All data were analysed using RevMan 4.1. When possible meta-analysis was performed to calculate typical relative risk, typical risk difference, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Four small trials comparing spinal with general anaesthesia in the repair of inguinal hernia were identified. One trial was excluded due to inadequate information. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportions of infants having postoperative apnoea/bradycardia, typical RR 0.69 (0.40, 1.21) or postoperative oxygen desaturations, RR 0.91 (0.61, 1.37). If infants having preoperative sedatives were excluded, then the meta-analysis supported a reduction in postoperative apnoea in the spinal anaesthetic group, typical RR 0.39 (0.19, 0.81). There was a reduction of borderline statistical significance in the use of postoperative assisted ventilation with spinal anaesthesia. There was an increase of borderline statistical significance in anaesthetic placement failure when spinal anaesthesia was attempted. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no reliable evidence from the trials reviewed concerning the effect of spinal as compared to general anaesthesia on the incidence of post-operative apnoea, bradycardia, or oxygen desaturation in ex-preterm infants undergoing herniorrhaphy. The estimates of effect in this review are based on a total population of only 108 patients or fewer.A large well designed randomised controlled trial is needed to determine if spinal anaesthesia reduces post-operative apnoea in ex-preterm infants not pretreated with sedatives. Adequate blinding, follow up and intention to treat analysis are required.

Anesthesia, Conduction↗