Dataset Information

The subcostal nerve as the target for nerve stimulator guided transverse abdominis plane blocks - A feasibility study.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

Transverse Abdominis Plane (TAP) block was originally described as a landmark-based technique. Peripheral nerve stimulator (PNS) guided blocks are still widely performed, where ultrasound is unavailable.

Methods

Cadaveric dissections were performed which showed the subcostal nerve following a predictable course at the lateral abdominal wall in the TAP. The subcostal nerve was identified by ultrasound in three volunteers. Stimulation of the subcostal nerve was performed using PNS and landmarks as guidance in and 20 patients. Twitches of the anterior abdominal wall muscles were elicited, and needle position and drug dispersion were confirmed using ultrasound.

Results

Out of 32 attempts made, the drug dispersion was appropriate in 24, not appropriate on four insertions and twitches were not elicited in 4 attempts.

Conclusion

Nerve stimulator can be used as a guidance for TAP blocks where the availability of ultrasound is limited.

SUBMITTER: Vadhanan P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6460979 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is an important non-narcotic adjunct for post-operative pain control in abdominal surgery. Surgeons can use laparoscopic guidance for TAP block placement (LTAP), however, direct comparisons to conventional ultrasound-guided TAP (UTAPs) have been lacking. The aim of this study is to determine if surgeon placed LTAPs were non-inferior to anesthesia placed UTAPs for post-operative pain control in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.MethodsThis was a prospective, randomized, patient and observer blinded parallel-arm non-inferiority trial conducted at a single tertiary academic center between 2016 and 2018 on adult patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Narcotic consumption and pain scores were compared for LTAP vs. UTAP for 48 h post-operatively.Results60 patients completed the trial (31 UTAP, 29 LTAP) of which 25 patients were female (15 UTAP, 10 LTAP) and the mean ages (SD) were 60.0 (13.6) and 61.5 (14.3) in the UTAP and LTAP groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in post-operative narcotic consumption between UTAP and LTAP at the time of PACU discharge (median [IQR] milligrams of morphine, 1.8 [0-4.5] UTAP vs. 0 [0-8.7] LTAP P = .32), 6 h post-operatively (5.4 [1.8-17.1] UTAP vs. 3.6 [0-12.6] LTAP P = .28), at 12 h post-operatively (9.0 [3.6-29.4] UTAP vs. 7.2 [0.9-22.5] LTAP P = .51), at 24 h post-operatively (9.0 [3.6-29.4] UTAP vs. 7.2 [0.9-22.5] LTAP P = .63), and 48 h post-operatively (39.9 [7.5-70.2] UTAP vs. 22.2 [7.5-63.8] LTAP P = .41). Patient-reported pain scores as well as pre-, intra-, and post-operative course were similar between groups. Non-inferiority criteria were met at all post-op time points up to and including 24 h but not at 48 h.ConclusionsSurgeon-delivered LTAPs are safe, effective, and non-inferior to anesthesia-administered UTAPs in the immediate post-operative period.Trial registryThe trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT03577912.