ASSESSMENT OF ADVERSE EFFECTS OF BRACHIAL PLEXUS NERVE BLOCKING AT THE INTERSCALENE LINE AND SUPRASCAPULAR NERVE COMBINED WITH AXILLARY NERVE BLOCKING UNDER ULTRASOUND GUIDANCE FOR SHOULDER ARTHROSCOPY SURGERY
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To assess the adverse effects of brachial plexus nerve blocking at the interscalene line and suprascapular nerve combined with axillary nerve blocking with ropivacaine 0.25%. Method: Prospective intervention, comparing 60 patients receiving regional anesthesia for shoulder arthroscopy and randomly divided into 2 groups: Group 1: 30 patients receiving 10 ml ropivacaine to the supraclavicular nerve and 10 ml of 0.25% ropivacaine to the axillary nerve under ultrasound guidance pre-anesthesia. Group 2: 30 patients were injected with 20 ml of ropivacaine 0.25% into the brachial plexus at the interscalene line under ultrasound guidance pre-anesthesia. Results: The feeling of nausea or vomiting after surgery gradually decreased over the study time points from T0-T8.The rate of diaphragmatic paralysis and hoarseness after surgery of brachial plexus nerve blocking at the interscalene line was higher than that of the group with axillary nerve combined with axillary nerve blocking, respectively 33.3% compared with 0% and 36.7% compared to 0%, the difference was statistically significant with p<0.01. None of the patients in brachial plexus nerve blocking at the interscalene line group could move the arm and thumb after anaesthesia, only 5 patients (16.7%) could move the hand, and the state of numbness of forearm was prolonged after the surgery. Recovery of numbness after 24 hours 36.7%, after 36 hours is 10% more, and after 48 hours it is still about 10%. While the patients in supraclavicular nerve combined with the axillary nerve blocking group still able to move and feel the forearm, hand, thumb normally. Patients had a high level of satisfaction in both study groups. The rate of very satisfied patients in group 1 was 90%, higher than that in group 2 was 63.3% (p<0.05). Conclusion: The rate of diaphragmatic paralysis and hoarseness was significantly lower in the group with selective supraclavicular nerve combined with axillary nerve blocking compared with the brachial plexus blocking at the interscalene line. In group 2, the rate of postoperative numbness was very high causing discomfort to the patient, while this rate in group 1 was 0%. Patients had a high level of satisfaction in both study groups.
Article Details
Keywords
shoulder arthroscopy, supraclavicular nerve, anesthesia, axillary nerve, brachial plexus
References
2. Costantino F, Didonato A, Fabrizio L, et al. Local Anaesthesia Efficacy as Postoperative Analgesia for Open Shoulder Instability Surgery: A Prospective Randomised Controlled Study. Published online 2012.
3. Yean Chin Lim, Zhao Kun Koo, Vivian. W. Ho., et al. Randomized, controlled trial comparing respiratory and analgesic effects of interscalene, anterior suprascapular, and posterior suprascapular nerve blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2012 Dec; 20(12):2573-8.
4. Jinlong Zhao, Nanjun Xu, Jiahui Li et al. Efficacy and safety of suprascapular nerve block combined with axillary nerve block for arthroscopic shoulder surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesthesiology. 2018; 129(1):47-57.
5. Lee SC, Chun YM, Joo SH, Lim HS. Comparison between two different concentrations of a fixed dose of ropivacaine in interscalene brachial plexus block for pain management after arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized clinical trial Korean J Anesthesiol. 2021 Jun; 74(3):226-233.
6. Ferré F, Mastantuono JM, Martin C, et al. [Hemidiaphragmatic paralysis after ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block: a prospective cohort study]. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2019 Nov-Dec; 69(6): 580-586.
7. Malik T, Mass D, Cohn S. Postoperative Analgesia in a Prolonged Continuous Interscalene Block Versus Single-Shot Block in Outpatient Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Randomized Study. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 2016;32(8):1544-1550.e1.