Locating the target nerve and injectate spread in rabbit sciatic nerve block

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to determine how close the needle tip is placed to the target nerve using a nerve stimulator and to determine how far the injectate spreads in percutaneous nerve blocks. METHODS: Twenty-four sciatic nerves of New Zealand white rabbits were located with a 2-dimensional needle manipulator and a nerve stimulator (pulse width: 100 micros for group I, 250 micros for group II). The stimulation current required to elicit a motor response for each insertion depth of the needle and the nerve-needle distance at which the required current reached the minimum were measured. Another 10 sciatic nerves were located manually using a nerve stimulator and neurolyzed with a mixed solution of 5% phenol and Indian ink (100 microL). RESULTS: The nerve-needle distance was in the range of -1.2 mm to +2.8 mm in group I (1.1 +/- 0.9 mm [mean +/- standard error] in absolute value) and -0.2 mm to +4.8 mm (2.2 +/- 1.7 mm [mean +/- standard error] in absolute value) in group II (positive values signify the center of the beveled surface is past the nerve), when the stimulation current reached the minimum (average minimum current: 0.47 mA in group I, 0.37 mA in group II). Indian ink spread over a significant distance (25.4 +/- 0.5 mm [mean +/- standard error]; range, 19-31 mm) longitudinally within the perineural tissue, and axonal degeneration was observed linearly at the peripheral portion of the nerve fascicle in a similar pattern as Indian ink spread. CONCLUSIONS: The target nerve was located within 5 mm from the needle with less than 0.5-mA stimulation current. The injectate spread to more than 20 mm on average even when a small volume (100 microL) of the injectate was injected in rabbit sciatic nerves.     

High or low current threshold for nerve stimulation for regional anaesthesia

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the application of high stimulation current thresholds (SCT) leads to a distant needle to nerve proximity (NNP) compared with low SCT during nerve localization for regional anaesthesia in pigs.
Methods: A minimal motor response to the stimulation of femoral or brachial plexus nerves in 16 anaesthetized pigs was triggered either by a minimal SCT of a low (0.01–0.3 mA) or a high (0.8–1.0 mA) current in a random order. After eliciting a motor response with a predetermined SCT, synthetic resin was injected via the needle. After postmortem dissection of the injection site, the localization of the resin deposition was determined verifying the final position of the needle tip. Depending on the proximity of resin deposition to the nerve epineurium, the needle tip placement was considered either as a close or a distant NNP.
Results: A total of 235 punctures were performed. Ninety-one punctures were carried out with low SCT and 92 with a high SCT. Fifty-two punctures served as a control (1.8–2.0 mA). All injectates following both high or low SCT were considered 'close needle tip to nerve placement', whereas 27 of 52 injectates of the control group appeared distant to nerve epineurium.
Conclusion: Regardless of the applied SCT, i.e. high or low, all resin deposition was found adjacent to nerve epineurium. These findings suggest that high and low SCT result in equivalent needle tip localization in pigs.     

Systematic evaluation of the highest current threshold for regional anaesthesia in a porcine model

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine systematically the highest minimal stimulation current threshold for regional anaesthesia in pigs. Methods: In an established pig model for regional anaesthesia, needle placements applying electric nerve stimulation were performed. The primary outcome was the frequency of close needle to nerve placements as assessed by resin injectates and subsequent anatomical evaluation. Following a statistical model (continual reassessment method), the applied output currents were selected to limit the necessary number of punctures, while providing guidance towards the highest output current range. Results: Altogether 186 punctures were performed in 11 pigs. Within the range of 0.3–1.4 mA, no distant needle to nerve placement was found. In the range of 1.5–4.1 mA, 43 distant needle to nerve placements occurred. The range of 1.2–1.4 mA was the highest interval that resulted in a close needle to nerve placement rate of ≥95%. Conclusions: In the range of 0.3–1.4 mA, all resin deposition was found to be adjacent to nerve epineurium. The application of minimal current intensities up to 1.4 mA does not obviously lead to a reduction of epineural injectate contacts in pigs. These findings suggest that stimulation current thresholds up to 1.4 mA result in equivalent needle tip localisation in pigs.     

Combination of intraneural injection and high injection pressure leads to fascicular injury and neurologic deficits in dogs

BACKGROUND: Unintentional intraneural injection of local anesthetics may cause mechanical injury and pressure ischemia of the nerve fascicles. One study in small animals showed that intraneural injection may be associated with higher injection pressures. However, the pressure heralding an intraneural injection and the clinical consequences of such injections remain controversial. Our hypothesis is that an intraneural injection is associated with higher pressures and an increase in the risk of neurologic injury as compared with perineural injection. METHODS: Seven dogs of mixed breed (15-18 kg) were studied. After general endotracheal anesthesia, the sciatic nerves were exposed bilaterally. Under direct microscopic guidance, a 25-gauge needle was placed either perineurally (into the epineurium) or intraneurally (within the perineurium), and 4 mL of lidocaine 2% (1:250,000 epinephrine) was injected by using an automated infusion pump (4 mL/min). Injection pressure data were acquired by using an in-line manometer coupled to a computer via an analog digital conversion board. After injection, the animals were awakened and subjected to serial neurologic examinations. On the 7th day, the dogs were killed, the sciatic nerves were excised, and histologic examination was performed by pathologists blinded to the purpose of the study. RESULTS: Whereas all perineural injections resulted in pressures < or =4 psi, the majority of intraneural injections were associated with high pressures (25-45 psi) at the beginning of the injection. Normal motor function returned 3 hours after all injections associated with low injection pressures (< or =11 psi), whereas persistent motor deficits were observed in all 4 animals having high injection pressures (> or =25 psi). Histologic examination showed destruction of neural architecture and degeneration of axons in all 4 sciatic nerves receiving high-pressure injections. CONCLUSIONS: High injection pressures at the onset of injection may indicate an intraneural needle placement and lead to severe fascicular injury and persistent neurologic deficits. If these results are applicable to clinical practice, avoiding excessive injection pressure during nerve block administration may help to reduce the risk of neurologic injury.     

Posterior subgluteal approach to block the sciatic nerve: description of the technique and initial clinical experiences

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A new posterior approach to the sciatic nerve in the subgluteal region was developed. We describe our clinical experiences on 135 consecutive patients. METHODS: All blocks were performed with a nerve stimulator (stimulation frequency 2 Hz; intensity from 1 reduced to < or = 0.5 mA before application). A line was drawn from the greater trochanter to the ischial tuberosity of the femur; then, from the mid-point of this line, a second line was drawn perpendicularly and extended caudally for 4 cm: the end of this line represented the entry point of the needle. Sciatic stimulation was elicited at < or = 0.5 mA; then ropivacaine 0.75% 20 mL was injected. An independent observer recorded the time from needle insertion to successful sciatic nerve stimulation (performance time), the depth of appropriate sciatic stimulation and the number of needle redirections, as well as the quality of nerve block, the discomfort during the procedure and patient acceptance. RESULTS: The performance time was 41 +/- 25 s (mean +/- SD) and the mean (SD) depth at which the sciatic nerve stimulation was found was 45 +/- 10 mm. The median (range) number of needle redirections required to find the proper sciatic stimulation was 2 (1-5). The tibial response was observed in 77 patients (57%), while the common peroneal response was observed in 58 patients (43%). The degree of discomfort reported was very low and only 16 patients (12%) reported severe pain during placement of the block. The onset time (mean +/- SD) of sensory and motor block was 7 +/- 4 and 17 +/- 13 min respectively, and the surgical procedure was completed with only the peripheral nerve block in 127 patients (94%). The same anaesthesia procedure was acceptable by 127 patients (94%) and only eight patients (6%) would prefer a different anaesthesia technique in the future. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that the sciatic nerve can be easily blocked using this new posterior subgluteal approach, suggesting that it represents a safe and effective alternative to block the sciatic nerve at a proximal level, with the potential for reducing the discomfort experienced by the patient during block placement.     

Electrical Impedance to Distinguish Intraneural from Extraneural Needle Placement in Porcine Nerves during Direct Exposure and Ultrasound Guidance

Background: Intraneural injection during peripheral nerve blockade can cause neurologic injury. Current approaches to prevent or detect intraneural injection lack reliability and consistency, or only signal intraneural injection upon the event. A change in electrical impedance (EI) could be indicative of intraneural needle placement before injection.

Methods: After animal care committee approval, eight pigs were anesthetized and kept spontaneously breathing. In four pigs (part 1), the sciatic nerves were exposed bilaterally for direct needle placement; in a further four pigs (part 2), the tissue was kept intact for ultrasound-guided needle placement. An insulated needle (Sprotte 24 gauge; Pajunk GmbH Medizintechnologie, Geisingen, Germany), attached to a nerve stimulator displaying EI (Braun Stimuplex HNS 12; B. Braun Medical, Bethlehem, PA), was placed extraneurally and then advanced to puncture the nerve sheath. Five punctures within approximately a 1-cm length of each nerve were performed. For each Part, overall EI at each compartment and EI after individual punctures were compared using a general linear model, with post hoc analysis using the Duncan multiple range test.

Results: The EI was lower extraneurally compared with intraneurally during open dissection (12.1 +/- 1.8 vs. 23.2 +/- 4.4 k[OMEGA]; P < 0.0001; n = 8) and when using ultrasound guidance (10.8 +/- 2.9 vs. 18.2 +/- 6.1 k[OMEGA]; P < 0.0001; n = 7 nerves were visualized adequately). The EI difference was maintained despite performing five sequential punctures.     

Elektrische Nervenstimulation in Abhängigkeit von der benutzten Impulsbreite Eine quantitative Untersuchung zur Annäherung der Nadelspitze an den Nerven

In the present study the difference of the distances of the tip of the needle to the nerve at similar current intensities but different pulse widths (100 microseconds vs. 1000 microseconds) were determined by means of 20 blockades of the sciatic nerve using the transgluteal approach of Labat. Comparable current intensities at different pulse widths (100 microseconds vs. 1000 microseconds) were compared in the same way, using the same position of the needle. At a pulse width of 100 microseconds and a current intensity of 0.30 mA, the tip of the needle is on an average of 5.0 mm closer to the nerve than with a pulse width of 1000 microseconds and a comparable current intensity of 0.28 mA (difference statistically highly significant; p < 0.005). The comparison of the current intensities at different pulse widths at the same needle-position shows that the difference of the current intensities becomes lower when approaching the nerve. At the most distant point measured in this study, a current intensity of 0.94 mA at 100 microseconds corresponds to an aquivalent current of 0.30 mA at 1000 microseconds (difference 0.64 mA); after an approach of 5.0 mm to the sciatic nerve, this difference is significantly lower (0.30 mA at 100 microseconds, 0.11 mA at 1000 microseconds, difference 0.18 mA; p < 0.01). This means that the control of peripheral nerve stimulation is superior at a pulse width of 100 microseconds because a similar distance corresponds to a greater difference of the current. The success rate of the blockade was 95% at a current of 0.30 mA at 100 microseconds. Nerve lesions or other complications have not been seen. In conclusion, safe and successful nerve blocks in patients without polyneuropathia using the peripheral nerve stimulation seems to be obtained at a current intensity of about 0.30 mA at a pulse width of 100 microseconds.     

儿科患者全麻下行周围神经阻滞成功率与神经电流刺激强度的相关性研究

背景本研究对产生运动反射的最小电流刺激强度与患儿全麻时行周围神经阻滞（PNB）的成功率,及其神经系统并发症发生率之间的关系进行了探讨。方法回顾费城儿童医院2002年10月至2006年7月的区域麻醉资料,将所有全麻时借助周围神经刺激器行单次PNB注射的儿科患者纳入研究范围。分析资料包括年龄、性别、阻滞类型、刺激阈值、感觉阻滞和运动阻滞程度以及神经系统并发症。结果研究期间共有660例患儿接受PNB。患儿平均年龄为13．8岁（范围为2-18岁）。采用的电流刺激强度为0．2～1mA（中位数为0．5mA,四分位间距为0．45～0．55mA）。成功率为96％。采用刺激阈≤0．5或〉0．5mA（96．3％vs95．9％;P=0．793）的两组间成功率差异无统计学意义。研究认为成功率与性别、阻滞类型、电流强度无明显关联。2例患儿在行坐骨神经阻滞后出现长达72小时的拇趾和足背的神经阻滞,但无长期后遗症。结论本研究发现弱刺激阈（≤O．5mA）和强刺激阈（〉0．5mA）可以取得相近的PNB成功率。所以,或许没必要在针刺操作时强求达到弱刺激阈（≤0．5mA）,因为这可能会增加神经内注射的风险。     

Neurologic and histologic outcome after intraneural injections of lidocaine in canine sciatic nerves

BACKGROUND: Inadvertent intraneural injection of local anesthetics may result in neurologic injury. We hypothesized that an intraneural injection may be associated with higher injection pressures and an increase in the risk of neurologic injury. METHODS: The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of laboratory animal care, and was approved by the Laboratory Animal Care and Use Committee. Fifteen dogs of mixed breed (16-21 kg) were studied. After general endotracheal anesthesia, the sciatic nerves (n= 30) were exposed bilaterally. Under direct vision, a 25-gauge, long-beveled needle (30 degrees) was placed either epineurally (n= 10) or intraneurally (n= 20), and 4 ml of preservative-free lidocaine 20 mg/ml was injected using an automated infusion pump (4 ml/min). Injection pressure data were acquired using an in-line manometer coupled to a computer via an analog-to-digital conversion board. After injection, the animals were awakened and subjected to serial neurologic examinations. One week later, the dogs were killed, the sciatic nerves excised and histologic examination was performed by pathologists blind to the purpose of the study. RESULTS: All perineural injections resulted in low pressures (< or = 5 psi). In contrast, eight of 20 intraneural injections resulted in high pressures (20-38 psi) at the beginning of the injection. Twelve intraneural injections, however, resulted in pressures of less than 12 psi. Neurologic function returned to baseline within 3 h after perineural injections and within 24 h after intraneural injections, when the measured injection pressures were less than 12 psi. Neurologic deficits persisted throughout the study period after all eight intraneural injections that resulted in high injection pressures. Histologic examination of the affected nerves revealed fascicular axonolysis and cellular infiltration. CONCLUSIONS: The data in our canine model of intraneural injection suggest that intraneural injections do not always lead to nerve injury. High injection pressures during intraneural injection may be indicative of intrafascicular injection and may predict the development of neurologic injury.     

Ultrasound‐guided approach to nerves (direct vs. tangential) and the incidence of intraneural injection: a cadaveric study

This study evaluated the incidence of nerve puncture and intraneural injection based on the needle approach to the nerve (direct vs. tangential). Two expert operators in regional anaesthesia performed in‐plane ultrasound‐guided nerve blocks (n = 158) at different levels of the brachial plexus in cadavers, aiming either directly for the nerve (n = 77) or tangentially inferior to the nerve (n = 81). After reaching the outer limit of the nerve, the needle was intentionally advanced approximately 1 mm in both approaches, and 0.2–0.5 ml of saline was injected. Each operator classified (in real time) the needle tip and injectate as intraneural or not. Video clips showing the final position of the needle and the injection were evaluated in the same manner by seven independent expert observers who were blinded to the aims of this study. In addition, 20 injections were performed with ink for histological evaluation. Intraneural injections of saline were observed by the operator in 58% (45/77) of cases using the direct approach and 12% (10/81) of cases using the tangential approach (p < 0.001). The independent observers agreed with the operator in a substantial number of cases (Cohen's kappa index 0.65). Histological studies showed intraneural spread in 83% (5/6) of cases using the direct approach and in 14% (2/14) of cases using the tangential approach (p = 0.007). No intrafascicular injections were observed. There was good agreement between the operators’ assessment and subsequent histological evaluation (Cohen's kappa = 0.89). Simulation of an unintentional/accidental advancement of the needle ‘beyond the edge’ of the nerve suggests significantly increased risk of epineural perforation and intraneural injection when a direct approach to the nerve is used, compared with a tangential approach.     

Distale Blockaden des N. ischiadicus

Background and objectives

The design of this study is related to an important current issue: should local anesthetics be intentionally injected into peripheral nerves? Answering this question is not possible without better knowledge regarding classical methods of nerve localization (e.g. cause of paresthesias and nerve stimulation technique). Have intraneural injections ever been avoided? This prospective, randomized comparison of distal sciatic nerve block with ultrasound guidance tested the hypothesis that intraneural injection of local anesthetics using the nerve stimulation technique is common and associated with a higher success rate.

Material and methods

In this study 250 adult patients were randomly allocated either to the nerve stimulation group (group NS, n?=?125) or to the ultrasound guidance group (group US, n?=?125). The sciatic nerve was anesthetized with 20 ml prilocaine 1% and 10 ml ropivacaine 0.75%. In the US group the goal was an intraepineural needle position. In the NS group progress of the block was observed by a second physician using ultrasound imaging but blinded for the investigator performing the nerve stimulation. The main outcome variables were time until readiness for surgery (performance time and onset time), success rate and frequency of paresthesias. In the NS group needle positions and corresponding stimulation thresholds were recorded.

Results

In both groups seven patients were excluded from further analysis because of protocol violation. In the NS group (n?=?118) the following needle positions were estimated: intraepineural (NS 1, n?=?51), extraparaneural (NS 2, n?=?33), needle tip dislocation from intraepineural to extraparaneural while injecting local anesthetic (NS 3, n?=?19) and other or not determined needle positions (n?=?15). Paresthesias indicated an intraneural needle position with an odds ratio of 27.4 (specificity 98.8%, sensitivity 45.9%). The success rate without supplementation was significantly higher in the US group (94.9% vs. 61.9%, p?<?0.001) and the time until readiness for surgery was significantly (p?<?0.001) shorter for successful blocks: 15.1 min (95% confidence interval CI 13.6–16.5 min) vs. 28 min (95% CI 24.9–31.1 min). In the NS subgroups the results were as follows (95% CI in brackets): NS1 88.2% and 22.7 min (19.5–25.9 min), NS2 24.2% and 43.3 min (35.5–51.1 min) and NS3 36.8% and 35.3 min (22.1–48.4 min).

Conclusions

For distal sciatic nerve blocks using the nerve stimulation technique, intraepineural injection of local anesthetics is common and associated with significant and clinically important higher success rates as well as shorter times until readiness for surgery. In both groups no block-related nerve damage was observed. The results indicate that for some blocks (e.g. sciatic, supraclavicular) perforation of the outer layers of connective tissue was always an important prerequisite for success using classical methods of nerve localization (cause of paresthesias and nerve stimulation technique). Additional nerve stimulation with an ultrasound-guided distal sciatic nerve block cannot make any additional contribution to the safety or success of the block. New insights concerning the architecture of the sciatic nerve are discussed and associated implications for the performance of distal ultrasound-guided sciatic nerve block are addressed.     

Ultrasound examination and localization of the sciatic nerve: a volunteer study

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the use of ultrasound for sciatic nerve localization. The authors evaluated the usefulness of low-frequency ultrasound in identifying the sciatic nerve at three locations in the lower extremity and in guiding needle advancement to target before nerve stimulation. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, 15 volunteers underwent sciatic nerve examination using a curved ultrasound probe in the range of 2-5 MHz and a Philips-ATL 5000 unit (ATL Ultrasound, Bothell, WA) in the gluteal, infragluteal, and proximal thigh regions. Thereafter, an insulated block needle was advanced inline with the ultrasound beam to reach the nerve target, which was further confirmed by electrical stimulation. The quality of sciatic nerve images, ease of needle to nerve contact, threshold stimulating current, and resultant motor response were recorded. RESULTS: The sciatic nerve was successfully identified in the transverse view as a solitary predominantly hyperechoic structure on ultrasound in all of the three regions examined. The target nerve was visualized easily in 87% and localized within two needle attempts in all patients. Nerve stimulation was successful in 100% after two attempts with a threshold current of 0.42 +/- 0.12 (mean +/- SD) eliciting foot plantarflexion or dorsiflexion. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary data show that a curved 2- to 5-MHz ultrasound probe provides good quality sciatic nerve imaging in the gluteal, infragluteal, and proximal thigh locations. Ultrasound-assisted sciatic nerve localization is potentially valuable for clinical sciatic nerve blocks.     

Ultrasound Examination and Localization of the Sciatic Nerve: A Volunteer Study

Background: Few studies have examined the use of ultrasound for sciatic nerve localization. The authors evaluated the usefulness of low-frequency ultrasound in identifying the sciatic nerve at three locations in the lower extremity and in guiding needle advancement to target before nerve stimulation.

Methods: In this prospective observational study, 15 volunteers underwent sciatic nerve examination using a curved ultrasound probe in the range of 2-5 MHz and a Philips-ATL 5000 unit (ATL Ultrasound, Bothell, WA) in the gluteal, infragluteal, and proximal thigh regions. Thereafter, an insulated block needle was advanced inline with the ultrasound beam to reach the nerve target, which was further confirmed by electrical stimulation. The quality of sciatic nerve images, ease of needle to nerve contact, threshold stimulating current, and resultant motor response were recorded.

Results: The sciatic nerve was successfully identified in the transverse view as a solitary predominantly hyperechoic structure on ultrasound in all of the three regions examined. The target nerve was visualized easily in 87% and localized within two needle attempts in all patients. Nerve stimulation was successful in 100% after two attempts with a threshold current of 0.42 +/- 0.12 (mean +/- SD) eliciting foot plantarflexion or dorsiflexion.     

The effects of three different approaches on the onset time of sciatic nerve blocks with 0.75% ropivacaine

We studied three different injection techniques of sciatic nerve block in terms of block onset time and efficacy with 0.75% ropivacaine. A total of 75 patients undergoing foot surgery were randomly allocated to receive sciatic nerve blockade by means of the classic posterior approach (group classic; n = 25), a modified subgluteus posterior approach (group subgluteus; n = 25), or a lateral popliteal approach (group popliteal; n = 25). All blocks were performed with the use of a nerve stimulator (stimulation frequency, 2 Hz; intensity, 2-0.5 mA) and 30 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine. Onset of nerve block was defined as complete loss of pinprick sensation in the sciatic nerve distribution with concomitant inability to perform plantar or dorsal flexion of the foot. In the three groups, an appropriate sciatic stimulation was elicited at <0.5 mA. The failure rate was similar in the three groups (group popliteal: 4% versus group classic: 4% versus group subgluteus: 8%). The onset of nerve block was slower in group popliteal (25 +/- 5 min) compared with group classic (16 +/- 4 min) and group subgluteus (17 +/- 4 min; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the onset of nerve block between group classic and group subgluteus. No differences in the degree of pain measured at the first postoperative administration of pain medication were observed among the three groups. We conclude that the three approaches resulted in clinically acceptable anesthesia in the distribution of the sciatic nerve. The subgluteus and classic posterior approaches generated a significantly faster onset of anesthesia than the lateral popliteal approach. IMPLICATIONS: Comparing three different approaches to the sciatic nerve with 0.75% ropivacaine, the classic and subgluteal approaches exhibited a faster onset time of sensory and motor blockade than the lateral popliteal approach.     

Threshold current for an insulated epidural needle in pediatric patients

We designed this study to determine the threshold current for nerve stimulation of an insulated needle in the epidural space. The intended dermatome was identified using the bony landmarks of the spine. An 18-gauge insulated Tuohy needle was inserted perpendicularly to the skin and advanced until "loss of resistance" was felt. A nerve stimulator was then connected to the insulated needle. Twenty patients were studied using an insulated Tuohy needle and one patient was studied using a noninsulated Tuohy needle. Muscle twitch was elicited with a current of 11.1 +/- 3.1 mA (mean +/- sd) in all patients in which an insulated needle was used. Muscle twitches were within 2 myotomes of the intended level (based on bony landmarks). Muscle twitch was not elicited with a noninsulated needle. After catheter threading, positive stimulation tests were elicited via epidural catheters in all patients (4.9 +/- 2.3 mA). Postoperative radiograph confirmed all catheter placements within 2 myotomes of the muscle twitches. Electrical stimulation may be a useful adjuvant tool to loss of resistance for confirming proper thoracic epidural needle placement. The threshold current criteria for an insulated needle (6-17 mA) would be higher than the original Tsui test criteria described for an epidural catheter (1-10 mA) in the epidural space.     

Ultrasound-guided posterior approach to block the sciatic nerve at the popliteal fossa

The recent introduction of ultrasound guidance for locating peripheral nerves and nerve plexi has allowed injection of anesthetic agents to block the sciatic nerve at the popliteal fossa proximal to division, thus preventing damage to adjacent structures, repeated punctures, and multiple nerve stimulations to verify anesthetic diffusion around the nerve. We report the case of a 23-year-old man, ASA I, who underwent reduction and osteosynthesis of a fractured right fibula. Ultrasound was used to guide the needle after identification of the sciatic nerve 10 cm from the knee fold and 3.5 cm deep. When the point of the needle was near the nerve, the nerve stimulator was switched on to 0.5 mA, and when no response was obtained the current was increased to 1.5 mA. The needle was moved slightly (1-2 mm) to produce a plantar flexion (tibial component) that persisted until stimulation had been reduced to 0.4 mA, at which time 30 mL of 1.5% mepivacaine was injected. The sonographic image during injection showed that the anesthetic had surrounded the nerve (donut sign). The motor and sensory block of the sciatic nerve was complete and no adverse events occurred during or after surgery. We conclude that the combination of ultrasound guidance and nerve stimulation allows the sciatic nerve to be located easily. The approach to the point before division of the sciatic nerve can be guaranteed so that puncture of neighboring vessels can be avoided and optimal anesthesia provided.     

What is the minimum effective volume of local anesthetic required for sciatic nerve blockade? A prospective, randomized comparison between a popliteal and a subgluteal approach

For sciatic nerve blockade, no study has defined the optimal volume of local anesthetic required to block the nerve. The current, prospective, randomized investigation was designed to find a minimum volume of 1.5% mepivacaine required to block the sciatic nerve using the subgluteal and posterior popliteal approaches. A total of 56 patients undergoing foot surgery were randomly assigned to receive sciatic nerve block by means of a posterior subgluteal (group subgluteal, n = 28) or a posterior popliteal (group popliteal, n = 28) approaches. All blocks were performed with the use a nerve stimulator (stimulating frequency, 2 Hz, intensity 1.5-0.5 mA) and a perineural stimulating catheter. In all patients, plantar flexion of the foot was elicited at <0.5 mA, to maintain consistency among groups. The volume of local anesthetic used in each patient was based on the modified Dixon's up-and-down method. Complete anesthesia was defined as complete loss of pinprick sensation in the sciatic nerve distribution with concomitant inability to perform plantar or dorsal flexion of the foot 20 min after injection. The mean volume of local anesthetic required to block the sciatic nerve was 12 +/- 3 mL in the subgluteal group and 20 +/- 3 mL in the popliteal group (P < 0.05). The ED95 for adequate block of the sciatic nerve was 17 mL in the subgluteal group and 30 mL in the popliteal group. The authors conclude that a larger volume of local anesthetic is necessary to block the sciatic nerve at a more distal site (popliteal approach) as compared with a more proximal level (subgluteal approach).     

Signs of inflammation after sciatic nerve block in pigs

Nerve stimulators are widely used to assist with peripheral nerve blocks but do not eliminate the risk of nerve injury. We evaluated the histologic findings 6 h after sciatic nerve block with bupivacaine in pigs. When a motor response was still obtained with a current <0.2 mA (n = 10), the postmortem microscopic evaluation revealed lymphocytes and granulocytes sub-, peri-, and intraneurally in 5 (50%) of 10 pigs. No signs of inflammation were observed when the muscle contraction was achieved with a current between 0.3 and 0.5 mA (P = 0.03). In conclusion, the current required to elicit a motor response, the position of the needle tip, and the subsequent likelihood of nerve damage merit further evaluation.     

Glossopharyngeal nerve evoked potentials after stimulation of the posterior part of the tongue in dogs

OBJECTIVE: Lower cranial nerve palsy is one of the most critical complications after posterior fossa surgery. However, no established monitoring procedures exist for glossopharyngeal nerve function. Therefore, glossopharyngeal nerve evoked potentials after stimulation of the posterior part of the tongue in dogs was studied to analyze whether glossopharyngeal nerve compound action potentials and evoked potentials are useful in the intraoperative monitoring of patients undergoing brainstem and cerebellopontine angle surgery. METHODS: Glossopharyngeal nerve action potentials and cortical potentials were evoked by stimulating the posterior part of the tongue in mongrel dogs. The potentials were evoked by supramaximal constant current electrical stimuli delivered with bipolar stainless steel needle electrodes and recorded with silver ball electrodes. RESULTS: Compound nerve action potentials were recorded from the exposed intracranial portion of the glossopharyngeal nerve. The latency of the initial negative peak of the action potentials was 2.8 +/- 0.6 milliseconds (mean +/- standard deviation; n = 17). Evoked cortical potentials were recorded on the coronal gyrus by stimulating the contralateral side. The latencies of the initial positive peak and negative peak were 20.1 +/- 3.7 and 35.7 +/- 8.2 milliseconds, respectively (n = 6). Ipsilateral tongue stimulation elicited biphasic evoked potentials on the coronal gyrus, which had small amplitudes and delayed latencies. Both compound nerve action potentials and cortical evoked potentials disappeared after sectioning of the glossopharyngeal nerve. CONCLUSION: The glossopharyngeal nerve action potentials and cortical potentials elicited by the stimulation of the posterior one-third of the tongue can be recorded. These evoked potentials represent a new means for intraoperative monitoring of patients undergoing surgery in the brainstem via the cerebellopontine angle, which involves the lower cranial nerves.