Suture-method versus Through-the-needle Catheters for Continuous Popliteal-sciatic Nerve Blocks: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Anesthesiology, ISSN: 1528-1175, Vol: 132, Issue: 4, Page: 854-866
2020
- 9Citations
- 35Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef6
- Captures35
- Readers35
- 35
Article Description
Background: The basic perineural catheter design has changed minimally since inception, with the catheter introduced through or over a straight needle. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently cleared a novel perineural catheter design comprising a catheter attached to the back of a suture-shaped needle that is inserted, advanced along the arc of its curvature pulling the catheter past the target nerve, and then exited through the skin in a second location. The authors hypothesized that analgesia would be noninferior using the new versus traditional catheter design in the first two days after painful foot/ankle surgery with a primary outcome of average pain measured with the Numeric Rating Scale. Methods: Subjects undergoing painful foot or ankle surgery with a continuous supraparaneural popliteal-sciatic nerve block 5 cm proximal to the bifurcation were randomized to either a suture-type or through-the-needle catheter and subsequent 3-day 0.2% ropivacaine infusion (basal 6 ml/h, bolus 4 ml, lockout 30 min). Subjects received daily follow-up for the first four days after surgery, including assessment for evidence of malfunction or dislodgement of the catheters. Results: During the first two postoperative days the mean ± SD average pain scores were lower in subjects with the suture-catheter (n = 35) compared with the through-the-needle (n = 35) group (2.7 ± 2.4 vs. 3.4 ± 2.4) and found to be statistically noninferior (95% CI, −1.9 to 0.6; P < 0.001). No suture-style catheter was completely dislodged (0%), whereas the tips of three (9%) traditional catheters were found outside of the skin before purposeful removal on postoperative day 3 (P = 0.239). conclusions: Suture-type perineural catheters provided noninferior analgesia compared with traditional catheters for continuous popliteal-sciatic blocks after painful foot and ankle surgery. The new catheter design appears to be a viable alternative to traditional designs used for the past seven decades.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85082146140&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/aln.0000000000003145; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31996555; https://journals.lww.com/10.1097/ALN.0000000000003145; https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/aln.0000000000003145; https://journals.lww.com/pages/results.aspx?txtKeywords=10.1097%2fALN.0000000000003145
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know