This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (10) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Klaastad, O. Articles by Fosse, E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Klaastad, O. Articles by Fosse, E.

---

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE

A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Modifications to the Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block

Øivind Klaastad, MD^*, Finn G. Lilleås, MD, Jan S. Røtnes, MD, PhD, Harald Breivik, MD, PhD, and Erik Fosse, MD, PhD

*Department of Anesthesiology, The National Hospital Orthopedic Centre; and The Interventional Centre and Department of Anesthesiology, The National Hospital, Oslo, Norway

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Ø. Klaastad, The National Hospital Orthopedic Centre, Department of Anesthesiology, Trondheimsveien 132, 0570 Oslo, Norway.

A previously described infraclavicular brachial plexus block may be modified by using a more lateral needle insertion point, while the patient abducts the arm 45° or 90°. In performing the modified block on patients abducting 45°, we often had problems finding the cords of the brachial plexus. Therefore, we designed an anatomic study to describe the ability of the recommended needle direction to consistently reach the cords. Additionally, we assessed the risk of penetrating the pleura by the needle. Magnetic resonance images were obtained in 10 volunteers. From these images, a virtual reality model of each volunteer was created, allowing precise positioning of a simulated needle according to the modified block, without exposing the volunteers to actual needle placement. In both arm positions, the recommended needle angle of 45° to the skin was too shallow to reach a defined target on the cords. Comparing the two arm positions, target precision and risk of contacting the pleura were more favorable with the greater arm abduction. We conclude that when the arm is abducted to 90°, a 65°-needle angle to the skin appears optimal for contacting the cords, still with a minimal risk of penetrating the pleura. However, this needs to be confirmed by a clinical study.

Implications: We studied methods for the administration of regional anesthesia of the upper extremity demanding needle insertion in the chest region by magnetic resonance imaging, without the use of any needle. The study suggests increasing the needle angle to the skin for better precision, still with a minimal risk for lung injury.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Arcand, S. R. Williams, P. Chouinard, D. Boudreault, P. Harris, M. Ruel, and F. Girard Ultrasound-Guided Infraclavicular Versus Supraclavicular Block Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2005; 101(3): 886 - 890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Klaastad, O. Smedby, T. Kjelstrup, and H.-J. Smith The Vertical Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Simulation Study Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2005; 101(1): 273 - 278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Klaastad, T. R. VadeBoncouer, T. Tillung, and O. Smedby An Evaluation of the Supraclavicular Plumb-Bob Technique for Brachial Plexus Block by Magnetic Resonance Imaging Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2003; 96(3): 862 - 867. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Borgeat, G. Ekatodramis, and C. Dumont An Evaluation of the Infraclavicular Block via a Modified Approach of the Raj Technique Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2001; 93(2): 436 - 441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. Klaastad and O. Smedby The Supraclavicular Lateral Paravascular Approach for Brachial Plexus Regional Anesthesia: A Simulation Study Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2001; 93(2): 442 - 446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Wedel Don't Try This at Home! Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2000; 91(4): 771 - 772. [Full Text] [PDF]