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 (33) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carles, M. Articles by Grimaud, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carles, M. Articles by Grimaud, D. Related Collections Regional Anesthesia

---

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE

An Evaluation of the Brachial Plexus Block at the Humeral Canal Using a Neurostimulator (1417 Patients): The Efficacy, Safety, and Predictive Criteria of Failure

Department of Anesthesiology, Hôpital St Roch, Nice, France

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Michel Carles, MD, Département d’Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital St Roch 5 rue Pierre Dévoluy 06006 Nice cédex 1, France. Address e-mail to michel.carles{at}biosys.net

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the multiple peripheral nerve block technique at the humeral canal (humeral block) with the use of a neurostimulator, we prospectively studied 1417 patients undergoing upper limb surgery with a brachial plexus block at the humeral canal (1468 blocks). The success rate (defined as sensory block [in all nerve distributions] and/or the absence of another anesthetic technique required to allow surgery) was 95%. The threshold of minimal stimulation used to locate each nerve before injecting the anesthetic solution was the unique predictive factor for identified failure. For the median nerve, the threshold was 0.8 mA with a relative risk of failure (RRf: relative risk evaluated by series of Taylor with a 95% confidence interval) = 1.49 (P = 0.04), for the radial nerve the threshold was 0.6 mA (RRf 1.3, P = 0.02), and 0.7 mA for the ulnar nerve (RRf 1.36, P = 0.04). For any equal or higher stimulation level, the risk of failure of the humeral block increased. For the musculocutaneous nerve, we did not observe a significant stimulation threshold for the risk of failure; although beyond 0.7 mA, the RRf was always more than 1.3. Adverse events occurred in 7% of all cases and were usually minor (nausea/vomiting, anxiety, local pain). Our study provides supplementary information on the efficacy and safety of this technique. Stimulation thresholds are clinically identified for the first time as the main factor linked to the failure of a technique using a neurostimulator. We conclude that the humeral block is a reliable peripheral block allowing good success rates results with minor complications, which can be used as an alternative to the axillary block.

Implications: We prospectively evaluated the feasability and the factors causing failure of a peripheral nerve block technique (humeral block) using neurostimulation in a large number of patients. The importance of the level of stimulation for the success of the block was evaluated for the first time.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Samson, V. Minville, C. Chassery, L. Nguyen, A. Pianezza, O. Fourcade, A. Rabinowitz, and K. Samii Eutectic Mixture of Local Anesthetic (EMLA(R)) Decreases Pain During Humeral Block Placement in Nonsedated Patients Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2007; 105(2): 512 - 515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Brull, C. J. L. McCartney, V. W. S. Chan, and H. El-Beheiry Neurological Complications After Regional Anesthesia: Contemporary Estimates of Risk Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2007; 104(4): 965 - 974. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Escobar, E. A. Davis, J. Ehrenwerth, G. A. Watrous, G. S. Fisch, Z. N. Kain, and P. G. Barash Task Analysis of the Preincision Surgical Period: An Independent Observer-Based Study of 1558 Cases Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2006; 103(4): 922 - 927. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. G. Voelckel, G. Klima, A. C. Krismer, C. Haslinger, K. H. Stadlbauer, V. Wenzel, and A. von Goedecke Signs of Inflammation After Sciatic Nerve Block in Pigs Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2005; 101(6): 1844 - 1846. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Minville, L. N'Guyen, C. Chassery, P. Zetlaoui, J.-C. Pourrut, C. Gris, B. Eychennes, D. Benhamou, and K. Samii A Modified Coracoid Approach to Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Blocks Using a Double-Stimulation Technique in 300 Patients Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2005; 100(1): 263 - 265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. D. Franco, V. Domashevich, G. Voronov, A. B. Rafizad, and T. J. Jelev The Supraclavicular Block with a Nerve Stimulator: To Decrease or Not to Decrease, That Is the Question Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2004; 98(4): 1167 - 1171. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Sia, A. Lepri, M. C. Campolo, and R. Fiaschi Four-Injection Brachial Plexus Block Using Peripheral Nerve Stimulator: A Comparison Between Axillary and Humeral Approaches Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2002; 95(4): 1075 - 1079. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Iskandar, E. Guillaume, F. Dixmerias, B. Binje, S. Rakotondriamihary, R. Thiebaut, and P. Maurette The Enhancement of Sensory Blockade by Clonidine Selectively Added to Mepivacaine After Midhumeral Block Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2001; 93(3): 771 - 775. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]