Wpływ wprowadzenia obrazowania ultrasonograficznego na jakość blokad splotu ramiennego wykonanych w Klinice Anestezjologii i Intensywnej Terapii CMKP w Warszawie w latach 2007-2013 - analiza retrospektywna

The first article on ultrasound guided nerve blocks was published in 1994. Subsequent years brought great progress in imaging techniques and their application in anaesthesia. The first ultrasound guided brachial plexus block at Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Teaching Ward CMKP was perform in 2009. Since then, the method took a permanent place in our clinical practice. Our aim was to present efficacy and security analysis of both ultrasoundguided and classical techniques of brachial plexus blocks performed in the years 2007-2013. During that period, there were 933 cases of brachial plexus blocks for upper limb surgery. The number of cases in classical technique method group was 698 procedures (74,8%), whereas in the ultrasound group - 235 (25,2%). We analyzed efficacy as conversion to general anesthesia percentage; also, the total volume of local anesthetics used and instances when additional analgesic drugs needed to be provided during surgery. In classical techniques group there were 45/698 conversions (6,45%) as compared to 7/235 (2,98%) in the ultrasound group (p<0,05). In classical method group, significantly more local anesthetics were applied – an average of 37,6 ml in comparison to 22,9 ml in the other group (p<0,05). There were no statistically significant differences in additional analgesia in either of the groups. Retrospective analysis of brachial plexus block techniques demonstrated that the use of ultrasound imaging reduced the conversion rate as well as the total volume of local anesthetics used, while use of the ultrasound technique increased blocks’ efficacy and security.Pierwsza praca opisująca zastosowanie ultrasonografii w blokadach nerwów ukazała się w 1994 roku. Kolejne lata przyniosły dynamiczny rozwój technik obrazowania i ich wykorzystania w anestezjologii. W Klinice Anestezjologii i Intensywnej Terapii Centrum Medycznego Kształcenia Podyplomowego (CMKP) w Warszawie pierwszą blokadę splotu ramiennego pod kontrolą ultrasonografii wykonano w 2009 roku. Od tego czasu metoda ta zajęła stałe miejsce w naszej praktyce klinicznej. Przedstawiamy analizę skuteczności i bezpieczeństwa blokad wykonanych pod kontrolą ultrasonografii oraz z użyciem metod klasycznych w latach 2007-2013. W badanym okresie wykonano 933 blokady splotu ramiennego do zabiegów w obrębie kończyny górnej. W grupie znieczuleń metodą klasyczną znalazło się 698 procedur (co stanowi 74,8%), w grupie z zastosowaniem ultrasonografii 235 (co stanowi 25,2%). Wszystkie znieczulenia przeanalizowano pod kątem skuteczności blokad, rozumianej jako odsetek konwersji do znieczulenia ogólnego; łącznej objętości podanych leków znieczulenia miejscowego (LZM) oraz zapotrzebowania na dodatkowe leki przeciwbólowe w trakcie zabiegu. W grupie blokad wykonanych metodą klasyczną odsetek konwersji wynosił 6,45% (45/698 znieczuleń), w grupie z zastosowaniem ultrasonografii 2,98% (7/235 znieczuleń) (p<0,05). W grupie metody klasycznej podawano znamiennie więcej LZM – średnio 37,6 ml w stosunku do 22,9 ml w drugiej grupie (p<0,05). Nie stwierdzono istotnych statystycznie różnic w zapotrzebowaniu na dodatkowe leki przeciwbólowe w obu grupach w trakcie zabiegu. Analiza retrospektywna blokad splotu ramiennego wykonanych w Klinice Anestezjologii i Intensywnej Terapii CMKP w latach 2007-2013 wykazała, że zastosowanie ultrasonograficznego obrazowania struktur nerwowych przy wykonywaniu blokad splotu ramiennego zmniejszyło ilość konwersji do znieczulenia ogólnego oraz objętość podawanych LZM. Zastosowanie ultrasonografii zwiększa skuteczność blokady splotu ramiennego oraz bezpieczeństwo pacjenta

Management practices for postdural puncture headache in obstetrics: a prospective, international, cohort study

© 2020 British Journal of AnaesthesiaBackground: Accidental dural puncture is an uncommon complication of epidural analgesia and can cause postdural puncture headache (PDPH). We aimed to describe management practices and outcomes after PDPH treated by epidural blood patch (EBP) or no EBP. Methods: Following ethics committee approval, patients who developed PDPH after accidental dural puncture were recruited from participating countries and divided into two groups, those receiving EBP or no EBP. Data registered included patient and procedure characteristics, headache symptoms and intensity, management practices, and complications. Follow-up was at 3 months. Results: A total of 1001 patients from 24 countries were included, of which 647 (64.6%) received an EBP and 354 (35.4%) did not receive an EBP (no-EBP). Higher initial headache intensity was associated with greater use of EBP, odds ratio 1.29 (95% confidence interval 1.19–1.41) per pain intensity unit increase. Headache intensity declined sharply at 4 h after EBP and 127 (19.3%) patients received a second EBP. On average, no or mild headache (numeric rating score≤3) was observed 7 days after diagnosis. Intracranial bleeding was diagnosed in three patients (0.46%), and backache, headache, and analgesic use were more common at 3 months in the EBP group. Conclusions: Management practices vary between countries, but EBP was more often used in patients with greater initial headache intensity. EBP reduced headache intensity quickly, but about 20% of patients needed a second EBP. After 7 days, most patients had no or mild headache. Backache, headache, and analgesic use were more common at 3 months in patients receiving an EBP

Management practices for postdural puncture headache in obstetrics : a prospective, international, cohort study

Background: Accidental dural puncture is an uncommon complication of epidural analgesia and can cause postdural puncture headache (PDPH). We aimed to describe management practices and outcomes after PDPH treated by epidural blood patch (EBP) or no EBP. Methods: Following ethics committee approval, patients who developed PDPH after accidental dural puncture were recruited from participating countries and divided into two groups, those receiving EBP or no EBP. Data registered included patient and procedure characteristics, headache symptoms and intensity, management practices, and complications. Follow-up was at 3 months. Results: A total of 1001 patients from 24 countries were included, of which 647 (64.6%) received an EBP and 354 (35.4%) did not receive an EBP (no-EBP). Higher initial headache intensity was associated with greater use of EBP, odds ratio 1.29 (95% confidence interval 1.19-1.41) per pain intensity unit increase. Headache intensity declined sharply at 4 h after EBP and 127 (19.3%) patients received a second EBP. On average, no or mild headache (numeric rating score <= 3) was observed 7 days after diagnosis. Intracranial bleeding was diagnosed in three patients (0.46%), and backache, headache, and analgesic use were more common at 3 months in the EBP group. Conclusions: Management practices vary between countries, but EBP was more often used in patients with greater initial headache intensity. EBP reduced headache intensity quickly, but about 20% of patients needed a second EBP. After 7 days, most patients had no or mild headache. Backache, headache, and analgesic use were more common at 3 months in patients receiving an EBP