Search PubMed⌕ 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 versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Regional and general anaesthesia (GA) are commonly used for caesarean section (CS) and both have advantages and disadvantages. It is important to clarify what type of anaesthesia is more efficacious. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of regional anaesthesia (RA) with those of GA on the outcomes of CS. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 December 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2005), and EMBASE (1980 to December 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of RA and GA in women who had CS for any indication. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, data extraction and trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen studies (1586 women) were included in this review. Women who had either epidural anaesthesia or spinal anaesthesia were found to have a significantly lower difference between pre and postoperative haematocrit (weighted mean difference (WMD) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 2.93, one trial, 231 women) and (WMD 3.10, 95% CI 1.73 to 4.47, one trial, 209 women). Compared to GA, women having either an epidural anaesthesia or spinal had a lower estimated maternal blood loss (WMD -126.98 millilitres, 95% CI -225.06 to -28.90, two trials, 256 women) and (WMD -84.79 millilitres, 95% CI -126.96 to -42.63, two trials, 279 women). More women preferred to have GA for subsequent procedures when compared with epidural (odds ratio (OR) 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.96, one trial, 223 women) or spinal (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.81, 221 women). The incidence of nausea was also less for this group of women compared with epidural (OR 3.17, 95% CI 1.64 to 6.14, three trials, 286 women) or spinal (OR 23.22, 95% CI 8.69 to 62.03, 209 women). No significant difference was seen in terms of neonatal Apgar scores of six or less and of four or less at one and five minutes and need for neonatal resuscitation with oxygen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from this review to show that RA is superior to GA in terms of major maternal or neonatal outcomes. Further research to evaluate neonatal morbidity and maternal outcomes, such as satisfaction with technique, will be useful.

Anesthesia, Conduction↗

[Perineal regional anaesthesia: indications in gynaecologic and proctologic surgery and in obstetric].

Perineal and proctologic surgery is well known as very painful. The apparition of new specific needles, long acting and less toxic local anaesthetics and neurostimulation allowed reconsidering some old forgotten techniques. Those blocks appear really useful to optimize multimodal postoperative analgesia and postoperative rehabilitation. After anatomic review, authors describe perineal regional anaesthesia and discuss about main indications and advantages, in the eyes of their experience and bibliographic review.

Anesthesia, Conduction↗