JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Anesth Analg 2009; 109:1674-1678
© 2009 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181b92372
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Danelli, G.
Right arrow Articles by Fanelli, G.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Danelli, G.
Right arrow Articles by Fanelli, G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Mechanisms
Right arrow Anesthetic Techniques
Right arrow Regional Anesthesia
Right arrow Pharmacology


ANALGESIA

The Effects of Ultrasound Guidance and Neurostimulation on the Minimum Effective Anesthetic Volume of Mepivacaine 1.5% Required to Block the Sciatic Nerve Using the Subgluteal Approach

Giorgio Danelli, MD, Daniela Ghisi, MD, Andrea Fanelli, MD, Andrea Ortu, MD, Elisa Moschini, MD, Marco Berti, MD, Stefanie Ziegler, MD, and Guido Fanelli, MD

From the Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy, University Hospital, Parma, Italy.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Giorgio Danelli, MD, Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy, University Hospital of Parma, Viale Gramsci 14, 43100 Parma, PR, Italy. Address e-mail to gdanelli{at}ao.pr.it.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We tested the hypothesis that ultrasound (US) guidance may reduce the minimum effective anesthetic volume (MEAV50) of 1.5% mepivacaine required to block the sciatic nerve with a subgluteal approach compared with neurostimulation (NS).

METHODS: After premedication and single-injection femoral nerve block, 60 patients undergoing knee arthroscopy were randomly allocated to receive a sciatic nerve block with either NS (n = 30) or US (n = 30). In the US group, the sciatic nerve was localized between the ischial tuberosity and the greater trochanter. In the NS group, the appropriate muscular response (foot plantar flexion or inversion) was elicited (1.5 mA, 2 Hz, 0.1 ms) and maintained to ≤0.5 mA. The volume of the injected local anesthetic was varied for consecutive patients based on an up-and-down method, according to the response of the previous patient. The initial volume was 12 mL. An independent observer evaluated the occurrence of complete loss of pinprick sensation and motor block: positive or negative responses within 20 min after the injection determined a 2-mL decrease or increase for the next patient, respectively.

RESULTS: The mean MEAV50 for sciatic nerve block was 12 mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 10–23 mL) in Group US and 19 mL (95% CI, 15–23 mL) in Group NS (P < 0.001). The effective dose in 95% of cases was 14 mL (95% CI, 12–17 mL) in Group US and 29 mL (95% CI, 25–40 mL) in Group NS (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS: US provided a 37% reduction in the MEAV50 of 1.5% mepivacaine required to block the sciatic nerve compared with NS.







Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2009 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2009 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.