Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on May 3, 2007
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007 98(6):823-827; doi:10.1093/bja/aem100
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
98/6/823    most recent
aem100v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Casati, A.
Right arrow Articles by Fanelli, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Casati, A.
Right arrow Articles by Fanelli, G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Effects of ultrasound guidance on the minimum effective anaesthetic volume required to block the femoral nerve

A. Casati{dagger}, M. Baciarello, S. Di Cianni, G. Danelli, G. De Marco, S. Leone, M. Rossi and G. Fanelli*

Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy, University of Parma, Ospedale Maggiore di Parma, via Gramsci 14, 43100 Parma, Italy

* Corresponding author. E-mail: guido.fanelli{at}unipr.it

Background: We tested the hypothesis that ultrasound guidance may reduce the minimum effective anaesthetic volume (MEAV50) of ropivacaine 0.5% required to block the femoral nerve compared with nerve stimulation guidance.

Methods: After standard premedication and sciatic nerve block were given, 60 patients undergoing knee arthroscopy were randomly allocated to receive a femoral nerve block with ropivacaine 0.5% using either nerve stimulation (group NS, n = 30) or ultrasound (group US, n = 30) guidance. The volume of the injected solution was varied for consecutive patients based on an up-and-down staircase method according to the response of the previous patient. The initial volume was 12 ml. A double-blinded observer evaluated the occurrence of complete loss of pinprick sensation in the femoral nerve distribution, with concomitant block of the quadriceps muscle: positive or negative responses within 30 min after the injection determined a 3 ml decrease or increase for the next patient, respectively.

Results: The mean (SD) MEAV50 for femoral nerve block was 15 (4) ml (95% CI, 7–23 ml) in group US and 26 (4) ml (95% CI, 19–33 ml) in group NS (P = 0.002). The effective dose in 95% of cases (ED95) calculated with probit transformation and logistic regression analysis was 22 ml (95% CI, 13–36 ml) in group US, and 41 ml (95% CI, fs 24–66 ml) in group NS.

Conclusions: Ultrasound guidance provided a 42% reduction in the MEAV of ropivacaine 0.5% required to block the femoral nerve as compared with the nerve stimulation guidance.

Keywords: anaesthetic techniques, regional, femoral nerve block; anaesthetics local, ropivacaine; equipment, nerve stimulator, ultrasound


{dagger} Dr Casati sadly died in a tragic accident in April, 2007. The other authors of this article would like to acknowledge the fact that he was a great man and an internationally acclaimed regional anesthesiologist.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
B. D. O'Donnell, H. Ryan, O. O'Sullivan, and G. Iohom
Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block with 20 Milliliters Local Anesthetic Mixture Versus General Anesthesia for Upper Limb Trauma Surgery: An Observer-Blinded, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial
Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2009; 109(1): 279 - 283.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.