2006Regional Anesthesia & Pain MedicineRequires access

A Comparison of Stimulation Patterns in Axillary Block: Part 2

Jorge Rodríguez, Manuel Taboada, Cristina Valiño, M. Bárcena, Julián Álvarez

Open publisher page 16 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation may have a predominant role in the success of an axillary block, producing more extensive anesthesia of the upper limb than median plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. However, no comparison has been made with ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. We compared the extent of both sensory and motor block after ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation or radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive an axillary block using either radial plus musculocutaneous or ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation with 40 mL plain 1.5% mepivacaine. Patients were assessed for sensory block by the pinprick method at 5 and 20 minutes. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in the rates of anesthesia at 20 minutes in the cutaneous nerve distributions of the upper limb between radial plus musculocutaneous and ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation except for the following nerves: radial (90% and 63.3%, respectively), medial cutaneous of the forearm (83.3% and 100%, respectively), and medial cutaneous of the arm (73.3% and 93.3%, respectively). Global sensory score (minimum: 0; maximum: 12 points) at 20 minutes was significantly higher after radial plus musculocutaneous than after ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation: 12 (11-13) and 11 (10-12), respectively. The rates of median nerve blockade were 50% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation produced more extensive anesthesia of the upper limb than did ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. However, there is not an optimal combination of 2 responses in axillary brachial plexus block.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation may have a predominant role in the success of an axillary block, producing more extensive anesthesia of the upper limb than median plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. However, no comparison has been made with ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. We compared the extent of both sensory and motor block after ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation or radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive an axillary block using either radial plus musculocutaneous or ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation with 40 mL plain 1.5% mepivacaine. Patients were assessed for sensory block by the pinprick method at 5 and 20 minutes. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in the rates of anesthesia at 20 minutes in the cutaneous nerve distributions of the upper limb between radial plus musculocutaneous and ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation except for the following nerves: radial (90% and 63.3%, respectively), medial cutaneous of the forearm (83.3% and 100%, respectively), and medial cutaneous of the arm (73.3% and 93.3%, respectively). Global sensory score (minimum: 0; maximum: 12 points) at 20 minutes was significantly higher after radial plus musculocutaneous than after ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation: 12 (11-13) and 11 (10-12), respectively. The rates of median nerve blockade were 50% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation produced more extensive anesthesia of the upper limb than did ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. However, there is not an optimal combination of 2 responses in axillary brachial plexus block.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation may have a predominant role in the success of an axillary block, producing more extensive anesthesia of the upper limb than median plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. However, no comparison has been made with ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. We compared the extent of both sensory and motor block after ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation or radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive an axillary block using either radial plus musculocutaneous or ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation with 40 mL plain 1.5% mepivacaine. Patients were assessed for sensory block by the pinprick method at 5 and 20 minutes. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in the rates of anesthesia at 20 minutes in the cutaneous nerve distributions of the upper limb between radial plus musculocutaneous and ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation except for the following nerves: radial (90% and 63.3%, respectively), medial cutaneous of the forearm (83.3% and 100%, respectively), and medial cutaneous of the arm (73.3% and 93.3%, respectively). Global sensory score (minimum: 0; maximum: 12 points) at 20 minutes was significantly higher after radial plus musculocutaneous than after ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation: 12 (11-13) and 11 (10-12), respectively. The rates of median nerve blockade were 50% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Radial plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation produced more extensive anesthesia of the upper limb than did ulnar plus musculocutaneous nerve stimulation. However, there is not an optimal combination of 2 responses in axillary brachial plexus block.

Key concepts: Musculocutaneous nerve, Medicine, Radial nerve, Ulnar nerve, Forearm, Mepivacaine, Anesthesia, Stimulation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A Comparison of Stimulation Patterns in Axillary Block: Part 2 — Research Paper | ScholarLens