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]


     


This Article
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
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koscielniak-Nielsen, Z. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Koscielniak-Nielsen, Z. J.

Anesth Analg 2007;104:454-455
© 2007 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000253580.71061.97


LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Section Editor:
Lawrence Saidman

Axillary or Humeral Block in Trauma Patients?

Zbigniew J. Koscielniak-Nielsen, MD, PhD, FRCA

Orthopaedic Anaesthesia Unit; Rigshospital; Copenhagen; Denmark; zjkn{at}rh.dk

To the Editor:

Fuzier et al. (1) recently compared double-injection axillary brachial plexus block with midhumeral block for emergency surgery of the upper arm. They define secondary block effectiveness as a surgical analgesia after supplementary blocks, and report 100% secondary block effectiveness in both groups. However, their Table 2 showed 93% effectiveness in the axillary block group (80% successful primary block and 13% supplemented) and 98% effectiveness in the midhumoral group (91% successful primary block and 7% supplemented). It is not clear why these numbers do not add up to 100%.

It is also unclear why the authors concluded that a double-injection axillary block was superior to a midhumeral block. More axillary blocks needed supplementary blocks. Analgesia of the musculocutaneous nerve was significantly poorer with axillary blocks. The onset time was similar. The only advantage of axillary block was patients’ shorter performance time and higher block tolerance. As shown by Kinirons et al., (2) discomfort during block placement can be reduced with sedation.

REFERENCES

  1. Fuzier R, Fourcade O, Pianezza A, et al. A comparison between double-injection axillary brachial plexus block and midhumeral block for emergency upper limb surgery. Anesth Analg 2006;102:1856–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Kinirons BP, Bouaziz H, Paqueron X, et al. Sedation with sufentanil and midazolam decreases pain in patients undergoing upper limb surgery under multiple nerve block. Anesth Analg 2000;90:1118–21.[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
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
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koscielniak-Nielsen, Z. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Koscielniak-Nielsen, Z. J.


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2007 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press