Safety and efficacy of the popliteal fossa nerve block when utilized for foot and ankle surgery

The popliteal fossa nerve block (PFNB) offers numerous advantages that make it a suitable anesthetic technique for foot and ankle surgery. In this retrospective study, we investigated the acute and long-term safety and efficacy of this relatively underutilized anesthetic technique for foot and ankle surgery. A review of 834 patients who underwent foot and/or ankle surgery by the coauthor (NAA) was conducted. Four hundred sixty-seven patients received a PFNB with the aid of a peripheral nerve stimulator. Variables assessed included the quality of surgical anesthesia, postoperative analgesia and the acute and long-term incidence of postoperative neuralgia and neuropraxia. The PFNBs were performed by anesthesiologists with various levels of training at a tertiary care hospital and all were supplemented with a saphenous nerve block. The PFNB was successful as the sole anesthetic technique in 79% of the cases; 18% were converted to general anesthesia and 3% required augmentation with local anesthetic. There were no complications associated with the PFNB. There were no incidents of postoperative neuralgia or neuropraxia. Only 12% of patients with a successful block required analgesics in the PACU, while 60% of patients with a failed block required systemic analgesics for surgical site pain (p<0.01). These results suggest that the performance of the PFNB with the guidance of a peripheral nerve stimulator is a safe and effective anesthetic technique for foot and ankle surgery.     

Spinal Anesthesia With Peripheral Nerve Block Versus General Anesthesia With Peripheral Nerve Block for Elective Foot and Ankle Surgeries: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

Peripheral nerve blocks are the regional techniques in orthopedic surgeries to control postoperative pain and have early discharge from hospital. However, anesthesia protocols for foot and ankle surgeries of institutes do not include multimodal analgesics including peripheral nerve blocks. The objective of the study was to compare spinal anesthesia with peripheral nerve block against general anesthesia with peripheral nerve block for elective foot and ankle surgeries. Patients have treated for elective foot and ankle surgery under general anesthesia (using propofol, 0.05 mg/kg dezocine, and 1% sevoflurane; GA cohort, n = 112) or spinal anesthesia (using 0.5% bupivacaine, propofol, and 0.05 mg/kg dezocine; SA cohort, n = 132) or patients have treated for elective for foot and ankle surgery under general anesthesia (GL cohort, n = 115) or spinal anesthesia (SL cohort, n = 160) with the use of peripheral nerve block (the sciatic nerve blocks and adductor canal nerve blocks using 0.25% bupivacaine and 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone). Propofol was administered in fewer amounts if anesthesia was used with the peripheral nerve block. Patients of the GL cohort were transferred to ward 36 minutes (mean) earlier than those of the SL cohort. None of the patients of the GL and the SL cohorts have received intraoperative opioid(s) for the management of pain. Patients of the GL and the SL cohorts have reported postoperative falls within 1 day after surgeries during movement. Patients of the SL cohort experienced more frequently difficulty with sleeping. Patients of the GL and the GA cohorts have reported nausea and vomiting. Only patients of the GL cohort were required usage of vasoactive drugs. The study provides information to anesthesiologists and surgeons regarding anesthesia techniques for elective foot and ankle surgeries for better surgical outcomes (Technical Efficacy Stage: 4).     

Distal peripheral nerve blockade for patients undergoing hand surgery: a pilot study

BackgroundData are limited regarding the use of peripheral nerve blockade at the level of the forearm, and most studies regard these procedures as rescue techniques for failed or incomplete blocks. The purpose of the study was to investigate patients undergoing hand surgery with distal peripheral nerve (forearm) blocks and compare them with patients having similar procedures under more proximal brachial plexus blockade. No investigations comparing distal nerve blockade to proximal approaches are currently reported in the literature.MethodsMedical records were retrospectively reviewed for patients who had undergone hand surgery with a peripheral nerve block between November 2012 and October 2013. The primary outcome was the ability to provide a primary anesthetic without the need for general anesthesia or local anesthetic supplementation by the surgical team. Secondary outcome measures included narcotic administration during the block and intraoperative procedures, block performance times, and the need for rescue analgesics in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU).ResultsNo statistical difference in conversion rates to general anesthesia was observed between the two groups. Total opiate administration for the block and surgical procedure was lower in the forearm block group. There was no difference in block performance times or need for rescue analgesics in the PACU.ConclusionsForearm blocks are viable alternatives to proximal blockade and are effective as a primary anesthetic technique in patients undergoing hand surgery. Compared to the more proximal approaches, these blocks have the benefits of not causing respiratory compromise, the ability to be performed bilaterally, and may be safer in anticoagulated patients.     

Techniques and complications of popliteal nerve blocks

BackgroundUse of popliteal nerve blocks (PNBs) as an alternative or adjunctive therapy to traditional methods of pain control (e.g., systemic or spinal anesthesia and opioids) is increasingly popular in foot and ankle surgery.MethodsWe reviewed online databases for literature on PNBs in foot and ankle surgery to analyze the various techniques and positioning used, the influence of drugs on their efficacy, and possible complications associated with their use. Thirty articles were identified with a predefined search criteria, followed by a review process for relevance.ResultsPatient demographics, procedure specifics, and block techniques, such as anesthetic used, can impact the duration and success of a PNB. Administration with ultrasound guidance proved superior to nerve stimulation, and preoperative administration was superior to postoperative administration.ConclusionsPNBs are an effective method to control postoperative pain with minimal complications, leading to decreased analgesic use, earlier discharge, and higher patient satisfaction.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study     

Lateral trans-biceps popliteal block for elective foot and ankle surgery performed after induction of general anesthesia

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine safety and efficacy of lateral transtendinous popliteal blocks performed after induction of general anesthesia for intraoperative and postoperative pain control in elective foot and ankle surgery. METHODS: The charts of 475 consecutive patients were retrospectively reviewed. The technique was a lateral transtendinous popliteal block under nerve stimulator direction (described in the text). Patient records were retrospectively evaluated from the postanesthesia care unit, as well as at followup on postoperative day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12. RESULTS: The block was complete in 398 patients (83.7%). An incomplete block was found in 77 patients (16.2 %). In the incomplete category, 21 patients (4.4%) had no pain but some motor function, 32 patients (6.5%) reported mild to moderate pain, and 24 patients (5.3%) had severe pain. The average block duration was 16.5 hours. There were no adverse effects documented in any patient at followup. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral popliteal nerve block after induction of general anesthesia appears to be safe and effective for intraoperative and postoperative pain control in elective foot and ankle surgery.     

Ultrasound-guided ankle block. History revisited

Following forefoot surgery, compared to the traditional multimodal approach, regional anesthesia and analgesia provides high quality pain relief, decreases opioids consumption and leads to very high satisfaction scores. Traditional regional techniques relied either on wound infiltration, landmark technique ankle blocks or popliteal sciatic nerve block. Numerous anatomic variations of the different nerves might lead to failure following a blind technique.The current evolution towards ambulatory care will push surgical teams to favor techniques that simplify postoperative treatment and encourages immediate ambulation.The development of Ultrasound Guided Blocks has enabled us to perform very selective and precise nerve blocks.Ankle blocks provide excellent intraoperative anesthesia as well as long postoperative pain relief. Complications are rare using regional anesthesia for postoperative analgesia even after extensive foot surgery.Revival of ankle blocks is a perfect example of the high impact of new technological advances in improving ambulatory surgical care after foot surgery.     

Combination Lower Extremity Nerve Blocks and Their Effect on Postoperative Pain and Opioid Consumption: A Systematic Review

The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature examining postoperative outcomes following single site and combined peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs), including (1) sciatic and femoral nerve, (2) popliteal and saphenous nerve, and (3) popliteal and ankle nerve, during elective foot and ankle surgery. We hypothesized that combination blocks would decrease postoperative narcotic consumption and afford more effective postoperative pain control as compared to general anesthesia, spinal anesthesia, or single site PNBs. A review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2009 to October 2019. We identified studies by using synonyms for “foot,” “ankle” “pain management,” “opioid,” and “nerve block.” Included articles explicitly focused on elective foot and ankle procedures performed under general anesthesia, spinal anesthesia, PNB, or with some combination of these techniques. PNB techniques included femoral, adductor canal, sciatic, popliteal, saphenous, and ankle blocks, as well as blocks that combined multiple anatomic sites. Outcomes measured included postoperative narcotic consumption as well as patient-reported efficacy of pain control. Twenty-eight studies encompassing 6703 patients were included. Of the included studies, 57% were randomized controlled trials, 18% were prospective comparison studies, and 25% were retrospective comparison studies. Postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain levels were reduced over the first 24 to 48 hours with the use of combined PNBs when compared with single site PNBs, both when used as primary anesthesia or when used in concert with general anesthesia either alone or combined with systemic/local anesthesia in the first 24 to 48 hours following surgery. Studies demonstrated higher reported patient satisfaction of postoperative pain control in patients who received combined PNB. Nine of 14 (64%) studies reported no neurologic related complications with an overall reported rate among all studies ranging from 0% to 41%. Our study identified substantial improvement in postoperative pain levels, postoperative opioid consumption, and patient satisfaction in patients receiving PNB when compared with patients who did not receive PNB. Published data also demonstrated that combination PNB are more effective than single-site PNB for all data points. Notably, the addition of a femoral nerve block to a popliteal nerve block during use of a thigh tourniquet, as well as addition of either saphenous or ankle blockade to popliteal nerve block during use of calf tourniquet, may increase overall block effectiveness. Serious complications including neurologic damage following PNB administration are rare but do exist.     

股神经联合坐骨神经阻滞应用在踝关节镜手术中的效果评价

目的 比较两种不同的麻醉方式在踝关节镜手术中的应用效果。方法 选择2018年1月至2019年12月在中山大学孙逸仙纪念医院行踝关节镜手术的患者60例,随机分为股神经组和腰丛组,每组各30例,股神经组实施股神经联合坐骨神经阻滞,腰丛组实施腰丛联合坐骨神经阻滞。比较两组患者术中和术后的麻醉和镇痛效果、麻醉操作时间、不同时间的心率及平均血压和麻醉并发症及不良反应。结果 两组患者术中额外使用局麻药和麻醉性镇痛药人数、术后24小时内静息或运动的VAS评分及额外使用镇痛药的人数和使用时间差异均无统计学意义;股神经组麻醉操作时间显著少于腰丛组;股神经组在麻醉操作过程中的心率和平均血压显著低于腰丛组;两组患者术后不良反应比较差异无统计学意义。结论 股神经联合坐骨神经阻滞与腰丛联合坐骨神经阻滞在踝关节镜手术中的麻醉和术后镇痛效果无显著差别,但前者麻醉操作时间更短,围术期生命体征更平稳。     

Nerve stimulator guided pudendal nerve block decreases posthemorrhoidectomy pain

PURPOSE: Based on our institution's initial results that reflected reduced postoperative pain using a modified pudendal nerve block technique, we conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind study to investigate whether a combination of general anesthesia and bilateral nerve stimulator guided pudendal nerve blocks could provide better postoperative pain relief compared to general anesthesia alone or in combination with placebo nerve blocks. METHODS: Following Ethical Committee approval and informed consent 90 patients scheduled for hemorrhoidectomy were randomized to three different groups of 30 patients each: general anesthesia alone, general anesthesia plus nerve stimulator guided pudendal nerve block or general anesthesia plus placebo nerve blocks. Postoperative pain, the primary outcome variable of the study, was assessed by visual analogue scale scores at predetermined time intervals during the postoperative period. Total amount of analgesics, time to return to normal activities and patient satisfaction were also recorded. RESULTS: The pudendal nerve block group was found to have better postoperative pain-relief (P < 0.005), reduced need for analgesics (P < 0.05), and also a more rapid return to normal activities (P < 0.001) compared to general anesthesia alone or in combination with placebo blocks. The pudendal nerve block group was also associated with significantly higher patient satisfaction (P < 0.001) compared to the other two groups. CONCLUSION: A combination of general anesthesia and nerve stimulator guided pudendal nerve block showed significantly reduced postoperative pain, shortened hospital stay, and earlier return to normal activity. Thus, this technique deserves more widespread use in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy.     

The use of a continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block after surgery involving the foot and ankle: does it improve the quality of recovery?

Popliteal sciatic nerve block is a commonly used technique for surgery involving the foot and ankle. However, pain can be difficult to control as the local anesthetic block wears off. Therefore, we hypothesized that extending the block by using a continuous infusion of bupivacaine (0.25%) would provide improved pain management and might facilitate the recovery process after foot or ankle surgery. In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 24 consenting patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique were studied. Before surgery, a popliteal sciatic nerve block was performed in all patients with an 18-gauge Tuohy epidural needle and a peripheral nerve stimulator. After injection of bupivacaine 0.25% 30 mL and placement of a 20-gauge catheter, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 0.9% saline (control) or bupivacaine 0.25% at a constant rate of 5 mL/h for up to 48 h after surgery. An 11-point verbal rating scale (0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) was used to assess the severity of pain. Opioid analgesic use was recorded at specific time intervals after surgery. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 1 week after surgery to assess pain scores, as well as patient satisfaction with their pain management and quality of recovery, by using a 100-point verbal rating scale (1 = highly dissatisfied to 100 = highly satisfied). In the bupivacaine group, there was a statistically significant reduction in the maximal pain scores (>50%) and in opioid use (>60%) during the postoperative period compared with the control group. Patient satisfaction with postoperative pain management (95 +/- 3 versus 77 +/- 13) and quality of recovery (96 +/- 7 versus 83 +/- 14) was significantly improved in the bupivacaine group (versus control). In addition, 40% of the patients in the bupivacaine group (versus none in the control group) were able to be discharged home on the day of surgery (P = 0.087). In conclusion, a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% decreased postoperative pain and the need for opioid analgesic rescue medication after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle, leading to improved patient satisfaction and quality of recovery. IMPLICATIONS: A continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% (versus saline) at the popliteal fossa by using a simple elastomeric pump is an effective method of decreasing postoperative pain, reducing the opioid analgesic requirement, and increasing patient satisfaction with pain management after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle. More importantly, the use of the continuous sciatic nerve block in the popliteal fossa facilitated an earlier discharge after lower extremity surgery.     

Ropivacaine or 2% mepivacaine for lower limb peripheral nerve blocks. Study Group on Orthopedic Anesthesia of the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, and Intensive Care

BACKGROUND: Intra- and postoperative clinical properties of sciatic-femoral nerve block performed with either ropivacaine at different concentrations or mepivacaine have been evaluated in a multicenter, randomized, blinded study. METHODS: Adult patients scheduled for foot and ankle surgery were randomized to receive combined sciatic-femoral nerve block with 225 mg of either 0.5% (n = 83), 0.75% (n = 87), or 1% (n = 86) ropivacaine, or with 500 mg of 2% mepivacaine (n = 84). A thigh tourniquet was used in all patients. Onset time, adequacy of surgical anesthesia, time to offset of nerve block, and time until first postoperative requirement for pain medication were evaluated by a blinded observer. RESULTS: The adequacy of nerve block was similar in the four treatment groups (the ratios between adequate:inadequate: failed blocks were 74:9:0 with 0.5% ropivacaine, 74:13:0 with 0.75% ropivacaine, 78:8:0 with 1% ropivacaine, and 72:12:0 with 2% mepivacaine). The onset of the block was slower with 0.5% ropivacaine than with other anesthetic solutions (P < 0.001). Regardless of the concentration, ropivacaine produced a longer motor blockade (10.5+/-3.8 h, 10.3+/-4.3 h, and 10.2+/-5.1 h with 0.5%, 0.75%, and 1% ropivacaine, respectively) than with mepivacaine (4.3+/-2.6 h; P < 0.001). The duration of postoperative analgesia was shorter after mepivacaine (5.1+/-2.7 h) than after ropivacaine (12.2+/-4.1 h, 14.3+/-5 h, and 14.5+/-3.4 h, with 0.5%, 0.75%, or 1% ropivacaine, respectively; P < 0.001). Pain relief after 0.5% ropivacaine was 14% shorter than 0.75% or 1% ropivacaine (P < 0.05). During the first 24 h after surgery, 30-37% of patients receiving ropivacaine required no analgesics compared with 10% of those receiving mepivacaine (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that 0.75% ropivacaine is the most suitable choice of local anesthetic for combined sciatic-femoral nerve block, providing an onset similar to mepivacaine and prolonged postoperative analgesia.     

Preoperative lateral popliteal nerve block for intraoperative and postoperative pain control in elective foot and ankle surgery: a prospective analysis

BACKGROUND: Limiting postoperative pain and minimizing systemic narcotic complications are important considerations in foot and ankle surgery to maximize patient comfort and promote early discharge from the hospital. Nerve blocks are valuable additions to perioperative care. A variety of nerve blocks have been advocated, but few reports have evaluated a preoperative supine approach for popliteal block in foot and ankle surgery. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated the effectiveness of a preoperative popliteal block in 25 consecutive patients undergoing a variety of foot and ankle procedures, as well as the length of block coverage, patient satisfaction, and any complications. Patients were monitored clinically and by a questionnaire at various time increments: preoperatively, in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), postoperative day one, and postoperative week one. RESULTS: Postoperatively, 15 of 25 patients had a complete block (motor and sensory), five of 25 patients demonstrated motor function, but denied sensation or pain, and the remaining five of 25 had sensation to light touch but no motor function or pain. None of the patients reported pain postoperatively in the PACU within an hour after surgery. The average time the block lasted was 14 hours. Overall satisfaction with the block on postoperative day one and week one was 4.8 out of 5. There were no intraneural injections, neurologic sequelae, or complications. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that a preoperative nerve block for a sedated patient in the operating room saves time, avoids patient discomfort, augments general anesthesia, provides good postoperative pain control, and has high patient satisfaction with no significant complications.     

阴部神经阻滞在痔手术中的应用

目的探讨阴部神经阻滞麻醉在痔切除手术中应用的临床效果。方法对两组各25例Ⅲ、Ⅳ度痔患者分别采用阴部神经阻滞麻醉及腰部麻醉,分别观察比较两组患者手术操作时间,术中麻醉效果,术后第一次疼痛的时间,最大疼痛分级,术后继发出血、尿潴留及恶心、呕吐情况。结果两组患者在手术操作时间及术中麻醉效果的比较上无显著性差异（P〉0.05）;阴部神经阻滞组术后第一次疼痛时间13.53±1.82 h相比腰部麻醉组6.15±2.60 h明显延长（P〈0.05）;阴部神经阻滞组在各时段最大疼痛分级明显优于腰部麻醉组（P〈0.05）;阴部神经阻滞组术后尿潴留及恶心、呕吐发生率比腰部麻醉组明显减少（P〈0.05）。结论阴部神经阻滞麻醉用于痔手术,麻醉效果好,镇痛时间长,降低了常规腰部麻醉带来的痔术后并发症的发生,并为门诊手术开展提供技术支持。     

Association of Multimodal Pain Control with Patient-Reported Outcomes in Children Undergoing Surgery

IntroductionOur aim was to describe practices in multimodal pain management at US children's hospitals and evaluate the association between non-opioid pain management strategies and pediatric patient-reported outcomes (PROs).MethodsData were collected as part of the 18-hospital ENhanced Recovery In CHildren Undergoing Surgery (ENRICH-US) clinical trial. Non-opioid pain management strategies included use of preoperative and postoperative non-opioid analgesics, regional anesthetic blocks, and a biobehavioral intervention. PROs included perioperative nervousness, pain-related functional disability, health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Associations were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression models.ResultsAmong 186 patients, 62 (33%) received preoperative analgesics, 186 (100%) postoperative analgesics, 81 (44%) regional anesthetic block, and 135 (73%) used a biobehavioral intervention. Patients were less likely to report worsened as compared to stable nervousness following regional anesthetic block (relative risk ratio [RRR]:0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.11–0.85), use of a biobehavioral technique (RRR:0.26, 95% CI:0.10–0.70), and both in combination (RRR:0.08, 95% CI:0.02–0.34). There were no associations of non-opioid pain control modalities with pain-related functional disability or HRQoL.ConclusionUse of postoperative non-opioid analgesics have been largely adopted, while preoperative non-opioid analgesics and regional anesthetic blocks are used less frequently. Regional anesthetic blocks and biobehavioral interventions may mitigate postoperative nervousness in children.Level of evidenceIII.     

Bilateral ilioinguinal nerve block for ambulatory varicocele surgery

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of bilateral ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve blocks for pain relief following ambulatory bilateral varicocelectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective and randomised. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty adult men scheduled for bilateral varicocelectomy were included in this prospective study. All patients had a standardised general anesthesia. After surgical procedures, patients were randomized into two groups: patients in group I received a bilateral ilioinguinal nerve block with 15 ml x 2 of 0.25% bupivacaine; patients in group II received subcutaneously 1 mg kg-1 of tramadol. Visual analogue pain scores at rest and during mobilisation were recorded at 5 min and 1, 3, 5 postoperative hours. The side effects of analgesia and amounts of rescue analgesics were recorded. RESULTS: Pain scores at rest and during mobilisation, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and additional analgesics requirement were significantly reduced in group I. There was no complication. CONCLUSION: Ilioinguinal nerve block is effective in controlling pain after bilateral varicocelectomy in ambulatory surgery.     

The effect of posterior tibial and sural nerve blocks on postoperative pain of patients following open reduction and internal fixation of calcaneal fractures

IntroductionPostoperative pain control and achieving opioid-free anesthesia are major issues for surgically treated patients with calcaneal fractures. We evaluated the potential role of posterior tibial and sural nerve blocks as a part of multimodal pain control techniques in patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of calcaneal fractures via extensile lateral approach.MethodsForty-eight patients randomly allocated to receive either posterior tibial and sural nerve blocks with bupivacaine (peripheral nerve block (PNB) group) or normal saline, after induction of general anesthesia. Patients were assessed for pain intensity, Interval from entrance to the recovery room to the first request for analgesic, recovery room and ward morphine consumption, global satisfaction and morphine side effects.ResultsPNB group had less pain score compared to sham block (SB) group at each time point measurement during recovery room stay. There was also significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the pain scores after 2, 4 and 6 h of the operation in the ward. Time to the first request for analgesic was significantly prolonged in the PNB group (P < 0.001). The recovery room and ward morphine consumption was significantly lower in the PNB group (P < 0.001). Global satisfaction in PNB group was significantly more than that of SB group. No complication related to the nerve block was detected at the first postoperative visit in the outpatient clinic.ConclusionPeripheral nerve block could result in less postoperative pain especially in the early hours after ORIF of calcaneal fractures and reduce opioid administration within the first 24 h following the surgery.     

Peripheral Foot Blockade Versus Popliteal Fossa Nerve Block: A Prospective Randomized Trial in 51 Patients

The majority of foot and ankle operations are performed on an outpatient basis and often under some form of regional anesthesia. In this prospective, randomized study of 51 patients undergoing elective unilateral forefoot procedures, we compared 2 different anesthetic techniques: the peripheral foot blockade and the popliteal sciatic nerve block. Variables assessed included the quality of surgical anesthesia, postoperative analgesia, and the incidence of postoperative complications. The anesthesia was classified as effective if it was the sole anesthetic technique for the forefoot surgery. We found successful results in both groups: 92% in the foot block group and 96% in the popliteal block group. Analysis of time required to perform the anesthetic procedure showed a significant difference between the 2 groups, with foot block being considerably faster (14.3 minutes vs 19.2 minutes for popliteal block) (P = .0078). Foot block patients demonstrated 10.96 hours of analgesia, whereas popliteal block patients exhibited 14.32 hours (P = .132). With a mean follow-up of 5.7 months, we did not find anesthesia-related complications in any of the patients. Both techniques showed a high level of safety and efficacy, with no significant difference detected between them. Our patients showed a high rate of satisfaction with both procedures (96% for foot block patients and 96.1% for popliteal block patients) and reported a good discharge disposition. These data show that both procedures are safe and effective anesthetic techniques and well suited to forefoot ambulatory surgery.     

Comparison of postoperative pain control methods after bony surgery in the foot and ankle

Background

We performed a prospective study to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of postoperative pain control methods after bone surgery in the foot and ankle.

Lateral popliteal block in foot and ankle surgery: Comparing ultrasound guidance to nerve stimulation. A prospective randomized trial

BackgroundThe popliteal block has several benefits in foot and ankle surgery. It reduces postoperative pain, limits the use of narcotics and facilitates early discharge. The aim of this prospective randomized trial was to evaluate whether ultrasound guidance improves block characteristics compared to the nerve stimulation technique in lateral popliteal blocks.MethodsPatients were randomized to receive either a lateral popliteal block using neurostimulation or ultrasound guidance. Block performance time, number of needle pricks, number of redirections were recorded. Pain upon admission to and discharge from post anesthesia care unit (PACU) was recorded. Block duration, patient satisfaction, pain at block site and amount of opioids used in PACU and between subsequent followup visits was recorded. Patients were followed for 12 weeks postoperatively.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of number of pricks, time for the block to wean, pain upon admission to PACU, amount of opioids received in PACU, pain upon discharge from PACU, pain at the operative site, pain at the block site, toe motor function and toe sensation. There was a statistically significant difference in the block procedure performance time between the two groups, with the control group being faster (P < 0.0001). A significantly larger number of patients in the control group required more than three needle redirections (P = 0.0060).ConclusionsThe lateral sciatic popliteal block using nerve stimulation had similar block characteristics and patient satisfaction with a significantly faster performance time compared to the ultrasound guided technique.Level of evidence: Level I, prospective randomized study.