Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy and acceptance of a new posterior subgluteus approach to the sciatic nerve, as compared with the classic posterior approach, 128 patients undergoing foot orthopedic procedures were randomly allocated to receive either the classic posterior sciatic nerve block (Group Labat, n = 64) or a modified subgluteus posterior approach (Group subgluteus, n = 64). All blocks were performed with the use of a nerve stimulator (stimulation frequency, 2 Hz; intensity, 1-0.5 mA). In Group subgluteus, a line was drawn from the greater trochanter to the ischial tuberosity; then, from the midpoint of this line, a second line was drawn perpendicularly and extended caudally for 4 cm. The end of this line represented the needle entry. In both groups, a proper sciatic stimulation was elicited at 0.5 mA; then 20 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine was injected. The time from needle insertion to successful sciatic nerve stimulation was 60 s (range, 10-180 s) with the Labat's approach and 32 s (range, 5-120 s) with the new subgluteus approach (P = 0.0005). The depth of appropriate sciatic stimulation was 45 ± 13 mm (mean ± SD) after 2 (range, 1-7) needle redirections in Group subgluteus and 67 ± 12 mm after 4 (range, 1-10) needle redirections in Group Labat (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.00001, respectively). The failure rate was similar in both groups. Severe discomfort during the procedure was less frequent and acceptance better in Group subgluteus (5 patients [8%] and 60 patients [94%], respectively) than in Group Labat (20 patients [31%] and 49 patients [77%], respectively) (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.005, respectively). We conclude that this new subgluteus posterior approach to the sciatic nerve is an easy and reliable technique and can be considered an effective alternative to the more traditional Labat's approach.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1040-1044 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Anesthesia and Analgesia |
| Volume | 93 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Publication status | Published - 2001 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Cite this
A new posterior approach to the sciatic nerve block : A prospective, randomized comparison with the classic posterior approach. / Di Benedetto, Pia; Bertini, Laura; Casati, Andrea; Borghi, Battista; Albertin, Andrea; Fanelli, Guido.
In: Anesthesia and Analgesia, Vol. 93, No. 4, 2001, p. 1040-1044.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - A new posterior approach to the sciatic nerve block
T2 - A prospective, randomized comparison with the classic posterior approach
AU - Di Benedetto, Pia
AU - Bertini, Laura
AU - Casati, Andrea
AU - Borghi, Battista
AU - Albertin, Andrea
AU - Fanelli, Guido
PY - 2001
Y1 - 2001
N2 - To evaluate the efficacy and acceptance of a new posterior subgluteus approach to the sciatic nerve, as compared with the classic posterior approach, 128 patients undergoing foot orthopedic procedures were randomly allocated to receive either the classic posterior sciatic nerve block (Group Labat, n = 64) or a modified subgluteus posterior approach (Group subgluteus, n = 64). All blocks were performed with the use of a nerve stimulator (stimulation frequency, 2 Hz; intensity, 1-0.5 mA). In Group subgluteus, a line was drawn from the greater trochanter to the ischial tuberosity; then, from the midpoint of this line, a second line was drawn perpendicularly and extended caudally for 4 cm. The end of this line represented the needle entry. In both groups, a proper sciatic stimulation was elicited at 0.5 mA; then 20 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine was injected. The time from needle insertion to successful sciatic nerve stimulation was 60 s (range, 10-180 s) with the Labat's approach and 32 s (range, 5-120 s) with the new subgluteus approach (P = 0.0005). The depth of appropriate sciatic stimulation was 45 ± 13 mm (mean ± SD) after 2 (range, 1-7) needle redirections in Group subgluteus and 67 ± 12 mm after 4 (range, 1-10) needle redirections in Group Labat (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.00001, respectively). The failure rate was similar in both groups. Severe discomfort during the procedure was less frequent and acceptance better in Group subgluteus (5 patients [8%] and 60 patients [94%], respectively) than in Group Labat (20 patients [31%] and 49 patients [77%], respectively) (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.005, respectively). We conclude that this new subgluteus posterior approach to the sciatic nerve is an easy and reliable technique and can be considered an effective alternative to the more traditional Labat's approach.
AB - To evaluate the efficacy and acceptance of a new posterior subgluteus approach to the sciatic nerve, as compared with the classic posterior approach, 128 patients undergoing foot orthopedic procedures were randomly allocated to receive either the classic posterior sciatic nerve block (Group Labat, n = 64) or a modified subgluteus posterior approach (Group subgluteus, n = 64). All blocks were performed with the use of a nerve stimulator (stimulation frequency, 2 Hz; intensity, 1-0.5 mA). In Group subgluteus, a line was drawn from the greater trochanter to the ischial tuberosity; then, from the midpoint of this line, a second line was drawn perpendicularly and extended caudally for 4 cm. The end of this line represented the needle entry. In both groups, a proper sciatic stimulation was elicited at 0.5 mA; then 20 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine was injected. The time from needle insertion to successful sciatic nerve stimulation was 60 s (range, 10-180 s) with the Labat's approach and 32 s (range, 5-120 s) with the new subgluteus approach (P = 0.0005). The depth of appropriate sciatic stimulation was 45 ± 13 mm (mean ± SD) after 2 (range, 1-7) needle redirections in Group subgluteus and 67 ± 12 mm after 4 (range, 1-10) needle redirections in Group Labat (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.00001, respectively). The failure rate was similar in both groups. Severe discomfort during the procedure was less frequent and acceptance better in Group subgluteus (5 patients [8%] and 60 patients [94%], respectively) than in Group Labat (20 patients [31%] and 49 patients [77%], respectively) (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.005, respectively). We conclude that this new subgluteus posterior approach to the sciatic nerve is an easy and reliable technique and can be considered an effective alternative to the more traditional Labat's approach.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034814380&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034814380&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 11574380
AN - SCOPUS:0034814380
VL - 93
SP - 1040
EP - 1044
JO - Anesthesia and Analgesia
JF - Anesthesia and Analgesia
SN - 0003-2999
IS - 4
ER -