A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia

Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Poorly controlled post-operative pain is a common cause of patient dissatisfaction. With future emphasis on value-based medicine, optimization of cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction is critical. Popliteal and saphenous nerve blocks are routinely use in f...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andrew Stith MD, Matthew Griffin MD, Thomas Haytmanek MD, Christopher Hirose MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2018-09-01
Series:Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011418S00464
id doaj-0cddcd90d6404c488f2d6f33412ae017
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0cddcd90d6404c488f2d6f33412ae0172020-11-25T03:19:58ZengSAGE PublishingFoot & Ankle Orthopaedics2473-01142018-09-01310.1177/2473011418S00464A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional AnesthesiaAndrew Stith MDMatthew Griffin MDThomas Haytmanek MDChristopher Hirose MDCategory: Other Introduction/Purpose: Poorly controlled post-operative pain is a common cause of patient dissatisfaction. With future emphasis on value-based medicine, optimization of cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction is critical. Popliteal and saphenous nerve blocks are routinely use in foot and ankle orthopaedic surgery and have become the gold standard for immediate post-operative analgesia. Traditionally a single long-acting local anesthetic agent is utilized which achieves analgesia for 6-24 hours. Recent evidence has shown that multimodal anesthesia with combined anesthetic agents remains effective for a longer duration compared to single-medication nerve blocks. The purpose of this study is to determine if patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery safely benefit from multi-modal compared with traditional single-medication nerve blocks. Methods: This was a two-armed, prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. The study population consisted of 70 patients from a single institution undergoing foot and ankle surgery by two fellowship-trained orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeons. 34 patients received a local anesthetic only popliteal and saphenous nerve block (Bupivacaine) and the other 36 patients received a triple additive nerve block (Dexamethasone, Clonidine, and Buprenorphine) in addition to Bupivacaine. Pre- and Post-operative assessments were performed to determine VAS pain scores, numbness, duration of anesthesia, patient satisfaction with analgesia, and oral pain medication use. Results: Triple additive (TA) nerve block mean duration to onset of pain was longer than for single agent (LA) nerve blocks (40.2 hrs vs 24.3 hrs respectively). Time to complete block resolution was also longer for the TA nerve blocks (82.3 hours) compared to LA blocks (38.7 hrs). 17/34 TA block patients had residual numbness at 1 week compared to 5/36 LA block patients. However, by 3 months there was no difference (8/34 TA and 7/36 LA). There was no significant difference in VAS scores or patient satisfaction rates at 1 week or 3 months. 7/34 TA block patients required narcotic refills compared to 6/36 LA block patients. There was no significant difference in complications between the groups. Conclusion: Triple agent nerve blocks give a longer duration of effective postoperative analgesia compared to single agent blocks. There was a higher rate of lingering numbness in the triple agent blocks at one week but not at 3 months. Patient satisfaction was very high for both groups regardless of their VAS pain scores. Triple agent nerve blocks demonstrate equivalent safety compared with single agent nerve blocks.https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011418S00464
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Andrew Stith MD
Matthew Griffin MD
Thomas Haytmanek MD
Christopher Hirose MD
spellingShingle Andrew Stith MD
Matthew Griffin MD
Thomas Haytmanek MD
Christopher Hirose MD
A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
author_facet Andrew Stith MD
Matthew Griffin MD
Thomas Haytmanek MD
Christopher Hirose MD
author_sort Andrew Stith MD
title A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia
title_short A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia
title_full A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia
title_fullStr A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of Two Methods of Regional Anesthesia
title_sort comparison of two methods of regional anesthesia
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
issn 2473-0114
publishDate 2018-09-01
description Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: Poorly controlled post-operative pain is a common cause of patient dissatisfaction. With future emphasis on value-based medicine, optimization of cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction is critical. Popliteal and saphenous nerve blocks are routinely use in foot and ankle orthopaedic surgery and have become the gold standard for immediate post-operative analgesia. Traditionally a single long-acting local anesthetic agent is utilized which achieves analgesia for 6-24 hours. Recent evidence has shown that multimodal anesthesia with combined anesthetic agents remains effective for a longer duration compared to single-medication nerve blocks. The purpose of this study is to determine if patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery safely benefit from multi-modal compared with traditional single-medication nerve blocks. Methods: This was a two-armed, prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. The study population consisted of 70 patients from a single institution undergoing foot and ankle surgery by two fellowship-trained orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeons. 34 patients received a local anesthetic only popliteal and saphenous nerve block (Bupivacaine) and the other 36 patients received a triple additive nerve block (Dexamethasone, Clonidine, and Buprenorphine) in addition to Bupivacaine. Pre- and Post-operative assessments were performed to determine VAS pain scores, numbness, duration of anesthesia, patient satisfaction with analgesia, and oral pain medication use. Results: Triple additive (TA) nerve block mean duration to onset of pain was longer than for single agent (LA) nerve blocks (40.2 hrs vs 24.3 hrs respectively). Time to complete block resolution was also longer for the TA nerve blocks (82.3 hours) compared to LA blocks (38.7 hrs). 17/34 TA block patients had residual numbness at 1 week compared to 5/36 LA block patients. However, by 3 months there was no difference (8/34 TA and 7/36 LA). There was no significant difference in VAS scores or patient satisfaction rates at 1 week or 3 months. 7/34 TA block patients required narcotic refills compared to 6/36 LA block patients. There was no significant difference in complications between the groups. Conclusion: Triple agent nerve blocks give a longer duration of effective postoperative analgesia compared to single agent blocks. There was a higher rate of lingering numbness in the triple agent blocks at one week but not at 3 months. Patient satisfaction was very high for both groups regardless of their VAS pain scores. Triple agent nerve blocks demonstrate equivalent safety compared with single agent nerve blocks.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011418S00464
work_keys_str_mv AT andrewstithmd acomparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT matthewgriffinmd acomparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT thomashaytmanekmd acomparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT christopherhirosemd acomparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT andrewstithmd comparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT matthewgriffinmd comparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT thomashaytmanekmd comparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
AT christopherhirosemd comparisonoftwomethodsofregionalanesthesia
_version_ 1724620022204071936