TY - JOUR
T1 - The Use of a New Device-Assisted Needle Guidance versus Conventional Approach to Perform Ultrasound Guided Brachial Plexus Blockade
T2 - A Randomized Controlled Study
AU - Vydyanathan, Amaresh
AU - Shaparin, Naum
AU - Agrawal, Priya
AU - Shetty, Naveen
AU - Nair, Singh R.
AU - Shilian, Nancy
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was financially supported by CIVCO Medical Solutions. They provided partial funding as an investigator-initiated study grant (Grant #OCT14-0474I). The Principal Investigator was Dr. Amaresh Vydyanathan. The sponsor was not involved in study design, data analysis or manuscript preparation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Vydyanathan et al.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Purpose: Ultrasound guidance during nerve blockade poses the challenge of maintaining in-plane alignment of the needle tip. The needle guidance device maintains needle alignment and assists with in-plane needle visualization. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the utility of this device by comparing procedure performance during brachial plexus blockade with the conventional approach. Methods: After the Institutional Review Board approval and obtaining informed consent, 70 patients receiving either interscalene or supraclavicular nerve blocks were randomly assigned into 2 groups, a conventional approach versus utilizing the needle guidance device. An independent observer recorded: total procedure time; needle insertion time; number of unplanned redirections; and number of reinsertions. Additionally, physician satisfaction and ease of needle visualization were assessed. Results: Data from seventy patients were analyzed. The median [25th percentile-75th percentile] time to complete the block by the device assisted needle guidance group was 3 (2–3.75) minutes and 4 (3–6) minutes in the conventional approach group (p < 0.001). Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed in the supraclavicular block and interscalene block. Supraclavicular blockade, needle insertion time (median [25th percentile-75th percentile] in seconds) (106 [92–162] vs 197 [140–278]), total procedure time (3 [2–3] vs 4.5 [4–6] in minutes) and unplanned needle redirections (2 [1–5] vs 5.5 [3–9]) were significantly lower in needle guidance group (p < 0.001). With interscalene blockade, needle insertion time (86 [76–146] vs 126 [94–295]) and unplanned needle redirections (2 [1–3] vs 4 [2–8.5]) were significantly lower with needle guidance (p < 0.001), but total procedure time was similar. All the physicians reported that they would use the needle guidance again, and 90% would prefer it for in-plane blocks. Conclusion: Performing regional blocks using the needle guidance device reduces needle insertion time and unplanned needle redirections in brachial plexus blockade. Moreover, physician satisfaction also improved compared to the use of the conventional technique.
AB - Purpose: Ultrasound guidance during nerve blockade poses the challenge of maintaining in-plane alignment of the needle tip. The needle guidance device maintains needle alignment and assists with in-plane needle visualization. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the utility of this device by comparing procedure performance during brachial plexus blockade with the conventional approach. Methods: After the Institutional Review Board approval and obtaining informed consent, 70 patients receiving either interscalene or supraclavicular nerve blocks were randomly assigned into 2 groups, a conventional approach versus utilizing the needle guidance device. An independent observer recorded: total procedure time; needle insertion time; number of unplanned redirections; and number of reinsertions. Additionally, physician satisfaction and ease of needle visualization were assessed. Results: Data from seventy patients were analyzed. The median [25th percentile-75th percentile] time to complete the block by the device assisted needle guidance group was 3 (2–3.75) minutes and 4 (3–6) minutes in the conventional approach group (p < 0.001). Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed in the supraclavicular block and interscalene block. Supraclavicular blockade, needle insertion time (median [25th percentile-75th percentile] in seconds) (106 [92–162] vs 197 [140–278]), total procedure time (3 [2–3] vs 4.5 [4–6] in minutes) and unplanned needle redirections (2 [1–5] vs 5.5 [3–9]) were significantly lower in needle guidance group (p < 0.001). With interscalene blockade, needle insertion time (86 [76–146] vs 126 [94–295]) and unplanned needle redirections (2 [1–3] vs 4 [2–8.5]) were significantly lower with needle guidance (p < 0.001), but total procedure time was similar. All the physicians reported that they would use the needle guidance again, and 90% would prefer it for in-plane blocks. Conclusion: Performing regional blocks using the needle guidance device reduces needle insertion time and unplanned needle redirections in brachial plexus blockade. Moreover, physician satisfaction also improved compared to the use of the conventional technique.
KW - brachial plexus blockade
KW - needle guidance
KW - needle visualization
KW - peripheral nerve blockade
KW - ultrasound guidance
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85134770029&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85134770029&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2147/LRA.S363563
DO - 10.2147/LRA.S363563
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85134770029
SN - 1178-7112
VL - 15
SP - 61
EP - 69
JO - Local and Regional Anesthesia
JF - Local and Regional Anesthesia
ER -