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

Nerve stimulator versus ultrasound guidance for placement of popliteal catheters for foot and ankle surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ultrasound guidance improves the quality of continuous popliteal block when compared with a nerve stimulator after major foot and ankle surgery.

DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial.

SETTING: Operating room, Postanesthesia Care Unit (PACU), and hospital wards of a university-affiliated hospital.

PATIENTS: 45 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients undergoing elective major foot and ankle surgery.

INTERVENTIONS: Placement of a popliteal sciactic nerve catheter using either nerve stimulator or ultrasound guidance. In the PACU, a continuous infusion of ropivacaine 0.2% was started at a basal rate of 4 mL/hr and adjusted in a standardized fashion to maintain visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores < 4. All patients also received intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia with hydromorphone and oral opioids.

MEASUREMENTS: VAS pain scores at rest and with physical therapy, ropivacaine use, opioid use, and opioid-related side effects were recorded.

MAIN RESULTS: Cummulative ropivacaine use was lower in patients whose catheter was placed by ultrasound than by nerve stimulator guidance (mean 50 vs 197 mL, P < 0.001). Pain scores at rest and during activity were similar between groups. Cumulative opioid consumption (mean 858 vs 809 mg oral morphine equivalents) and daily frequencies of nausea (5% to 33% vs 0 to 24%) and pruritus (0 to 21% vs 0 to 24%) were similar between groups. Length of hospital stay was similar between groups (3.5 vs 3.7 days).

CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound guidance was associated with less local anesthetic consumption than with the nerve stimulator; however, there was little clinical benefit, as all other outcomes were similar between groups.

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