Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Catheter orifice configuration influences the effectiveness of continuous peripheral nerve blockade.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We investigated perineural catheter threading distance and orifice configuration during continuous interscalene analgesia.

METHODS: One hundred fifty-three patients receiving an anterolateral interscalene catheter (catheter needle and nerve/plexus in a similar alignment) for elective shoulder surgery were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: following out-of-plane ultrasound confirmation of the needle tip immediately lateral to the C5/6 roots, a nonstimulating catheter was blindly advanced 0.5 cm (end-hole; n = 50), 2.5 cm (multiorifice; n = 50) or 5 cm (multiorifice; n = 53) beyond the needle tip. Ropivacaine 0.75% + lidocaine 1% (50:50) 20 mL was administered preoperatively via the catheter before surgery under general anesthesia. A ropivacaine 0.2% 2 mL/hr elastomeric infusion with mandatory 6 hourly (and on demand) 5-mL boluses was continued for more than 48 hrs with tramadol available as rescue. Patients were questioned in the recovery room, at 24 and 48 hrs for numerical rating pain score (0-10), ropivacaine bolus, and tramadol consumption.

RESULTS: Patients were more frequently pain-free in the recovery room in the multiorifice 2.5 and 5 cm groups compared with the end-hole 0.5 cm group (94%, 91% vs 66%; P < 0.001). During the first 24 hrs, the end-hole group demonstrated an earlier time to first pain (median, 10 vs17, 15 hrs; P < 0.001), higher "average pain" (median, 3 vs 1, 2, P = 0.004), and more ropivacaine bolus (median, 5 vs 3, 3; P < 0.001) and tramadol consumption (P = 0.01). Groups 2.5 and 5 cm did not significantly differ in any outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that multiorifice catheters provide superior intermittent bolus continuous peripheral nerve blockade compared with end-hole catheters. For anterolateral approach interscalene catheter placement, there is minimal benefit, either way, to 2.5- or 5-cm blind catheter advancement.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app