Dorsal Penile Nerve Block via Perineal Approach, an Alternative to a Caudal Block for Pediatric Circumcision: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background. General anesthesia combining with a caudal block (CB) has been commonly performed in pediatric patients undergoing circumcision surgeries. However, some severe complications have been suspected of a caudal block in the combined use. To avoid these issues of a caudal block, this study introduces a novel dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) via perineum guided by ultrasound as an alternative to a caudal block in pediatric circumcision surgeries. Methods. A total of 104 pediatric patients scheduled for circumcision surgeries were involved and randomly divided into 2 groups: the CB group (n=52) and the DPNB group (n=52). A laryngeal mask was inserted followed by induction and maintenance anesthesia of inhaled sevoflurane. In the DPNB group, a dorsal penile nerve block (DPNB) guided by a real-time ultrasonography was performed by a single injection via perineum of 0.25% ropivacaine plus 0.8% lidocaine with total injection volume of 3-5ml. In the CB group, a dose of 0.5 ml/kg was given via the caudal canal following the same general anesthesia with that of Group DPNB. The time to the first analgesic demand after surgery is the key data collected for comparing between the two study groups. Heart rates and respiratory rates changes before and during the surgical procedure, pain score when leaving the PACU, and the time taken for the first micturition after a surgery were also recorded to analyze the differences in analgesic effects between the CB and DPNB groups. Results. No significant difference in heart rates and respiratory rates was found between the two groups before and during the surgery. Pain scores were similar before pediatric patients leave the PACU. However, the time taken for the first micturition after a surgery in Group DPNB is shorter than Group CB. The patients in Group DPNB asked for analgesics later than those in Group CB. Additionally, no significant differences in adverse effects were noted between two groups except the numbness of the lower limbs occurring less in Group DPNB. Conclusions. The ultrasound-guided dorsal penile nerve block via perineal approach can basically act as a safe and effective alternative to the caudal block in pediatric patients undergoing circumcision surgeries. Clinical Trials identifier is ChiCTR-IPR-15006670. Protocol is available at http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=11319

Comparison of Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy with and without Foraminoplasty for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A 2-Year Follow-Up

Background. Both transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy with foraminoplasty (TF PELF) and transforaminal percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy without foraminoplasty (TF PELD) were developed for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients. However, the safety and effectiveness between the TF PELF and TF PELD have not been investigated. Methods. Of the included 140 LDH patients, 62 patients received TF PELF (PELF group) and 78 patients received TF PELD (PELD group). The operation time, the duration of staying at the hospital, and complication incidences were recorded. All patients were followed up for 2 years, where low back and leg visual analogue scale (VAS) pain ratings and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were compared between the 2 groups before and after surgery. Modified Macnab criterion was estimated for all patients at postoperative 2 years. Results. There were no significant difference of the operation time, number of days staying at the hospital, and the incidence of complications between the 2 groups (P>0.05). Two cases in the PELF group and 1 case in the PELD group received a second surgery due to unrelieved symptoms postoperatively. Low back and leg VAS and ODI scores decreased in both groups after operation (P0.05). Six patients in the PELF group and 3 patients in the PELD group did not continue the follow-up; thus, only 131 patients completed Macnab evaluation. The satisfactory rate was reported as 80.4% in the PELF group and 90.7% in the PELD group (P>0.05). Conclusions. This study suggested that the safety and effectiveness of TF PELF are comparable to TF PELD for LDH patients