BJA Advance Access published online on May 27, 2005
British Journal of Anaesthesia, doi:10.1093/bja/aei161
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 St Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Background. There is continuing debate as to whether the use of electrical stimulation that aids in localizing nerves is also beneficial for optimizing placement of nerve catheters and lead to improved clinical outcomes, such as reductions in pain scores and opioid consumption. Methods. We undertook a retrospective, non-randomized comparison of stimulating and non-stimulating nerve catheters in 419 patients undergoing total knee replacement between December 2002 and July 2004. Before surgery, patients received sciatic and femoral nerve blocks with a catheter for the femoral nerve. In 159 patients a stimulating catheter system (Stimucath; Arrow International, Reading, PA, USA) and in 260 patients a non-stimulating catheter system (Contiplex; B. Braun, Melsungen, Germany) was used. After surgery, pain scores and morphine consumption were recorded at 4-h intervals until the first postoperative morning. In a subset of 85 patients, the postoperative evaluation period was lengthened to 3 days. Results. Postoperative visual analogue scores (VAS) for pain were similar in the two groups during the first 24 h (P=0.305). In patients followed for 3 days, VAS scores did not differ on any of the days (P=0.427). Total morphine consumption did not differ on the first postoperative day (mean [95% CI]: stimulating, 12.4 [10.1-14.7] mg; non-stimulating 10.4 [8.9-11.8] mg; P=0.140) or on subsequent days. Conclusions. The practical advantages of the stimulating catheter, as reported by previous investigators, were not obvious in this clinical situation. In terms of outcome measures such as pain scores and morphine consumption, we found no significant differences between stimulating and non-stimulating catheters.
Accepted April 25, 2005
Clinical Investigation
Use of a stimulating catheter for total knee replacement surgery: preliminary results
2 Outcomes ResearchTM Institute and Department of Anesthesiology, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA
N. T. M. Jack, E-mail: nigel.jack{at}wxs.nl
Abstract 
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. D. Swenson and B. Bankhead Outpatient Continuous Peripheral Nerve Catheters Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2007; 104(5): 1304 - 1305. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. F. Stevens, R. Werdehausen, E. Golla, S. Braun, H. Hermanns, A. Ilg, R. Willers, and P. Lipfert Does Interscalene Catheter Placement with Stimulating Catheters Improve Postoperative Pain or Functional Outcome After Shoulder Surgery? A Prospective, Randomized and Double-Blinded Trial Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2007; 104(2): 442 - 447. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. M. Hayek, R. M. Ritchey, D. Sessler, R. Helfand, S. Samuel, M. Xu, M. Beven, D. Bourdakos, W. Barsoum, and P. Brooks Continuous Femoral Nerve Analgesia After Unilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: Stimulating Versus Nonstimulating Catheters Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2006; 103(6): 1565 - 1570. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. J. van Geffen and M. Gielen Ultrasound-guided subgluteal sciatic nerve blocks with stimulating catheters in children: a descriptive study. Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2006; 103(2): 328 - 33, table of contents. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Birnbaum, T. Volk, N. Jack, E. Liem, and L. Vonhogen Use of a stimulating catheter for femoral nerve block Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2006; 96(1): 139 - 140. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|