Cargando…

Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block

INTRODUCTION: To carry out ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root block (CNRB) safely, we investigated the frequency of risky blood vessels around the target nerve root and within the imaginary needle pathway in the actual injecting position. METHODS: 30 patients (20 men, 10 women) with cervical radi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Murata, Shizumasa, Iwasaki, Hiroshi, Natsumi, Yuta, Minagawa, Hiroshi, Yamada, Hiroshi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7002060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039292
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0006
_version_ 1783494331612528640
author Murata, Shizumasa
Iwasaki, Hiroshi
Natsumi, Yuta
Minagawa, Hiroshi
Yamada, Hiroshi
author_facet Murata, Shizumasa
Iwasaki, Hiroshi
Natsumi, Yuta
Minagawa, Hiroshi
Yamada, Hiroshi
author_sort Murata, Shizumasa
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: To carry out ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root block (CNRB) safely, we investigated the frequency of risky blood vessels around the target nerve root and within the imaginary needle pathway in the actual injecting position. METHODS: 30 patients (20 men, 10 women) with cervical radiculopathy who received ultrasound-guided CNRB were included in this study. We defined a risky blood vessel as an artery existing within 4 mm from the center of the target nerve root or located in the range of 2 mm above or below the imaginary needle pathway. RESULTS: Using the color Doppler method, the frequency of a risky blood vessel existing around 4 mm from the center of the C5 nerve root was 3.3% (1/30), whereas it was 3.3% (1/30) for the C6 nerve root and 23.3% (7/30) for the C7 nerve root. Hence, the C7 level had more blood vessels close to the target nerve root compared to the C5 and C6 levels, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.0523). On the other hand, the frequency of a risky blood vessel existing within 2 mm above and below the imaginary needle pathway was 3.3% (1/30) for the C5 nerve root, whereas it was 3.3% (1/30) for the C6 nerve root and 10.0% (3/30) for the C7 nerve root. The C7 level had more blood vessels within the needle pathway compared to the C5 and C6 levels, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.301). CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the risk of unintended intravascular injections, more careful checking for the presence or absence of blood vessels at the C7 level using color Doppler is necessary.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7002060
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70020602020-02-07 Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block Murata, Shizumasa Iwasaki, Hiroshi Natsumi, Yuta Minagawa, Hiroshi Yamada, Hiroshi Spine Surg Relat Res Original Article INTRODUCTION: To carry out ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root block (CNRB) safely, we investigated the frequency of risky blood vessels around the target nerve root and within the imaginary needle pathway in the actual injecting position. METHODS: 30 patients (20 men, 10 women) with cervical radiculopathy who received ultrasound-guided CNRB were included in this study. We defined a risky blood vessel as an artery existing within 4 mm from the center of the target nerve root or located in the range of 2 mm above or below the imaginary needle pathway. RESULTS: Using the color Doppler method, the frequency of a risky blood vessel existing around 4 mm from the center of the C5 nerve root was 3.3% (1/30), whereas it was 3.3% (1/30) for the C6 nerve root and 23.3% (7/30) for the C7 nerve root. Hence, the C7 level had more blood vessels close to the target nerve root compared to the C5 and C6 levels, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.0523). On the other hand, the frequency of a risky blood vessel existing within 2 mm above and below the imaginary needle pathway was 3.3% (1/30) for the C5 nerve root, whereas it was 3.3% (1/30) for the C6 nerve root and 10.0% (3/30) for the C7 nerve root. The C7 level had more blood vessels within the needle pathway compared to the C5 and C6 levels, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.301). CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the risk of unintended intravascular injections, more careful checking for the presence or absence of blood vessels at the C7 level using color Doppler is necessary. The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2019-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7002060/ /pubmed/32039292 http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0006 Text en Copyright © 2020 by The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Spine Surgery and Related Research is an Open Access journal distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view the details of this license, please visit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Murata, Shizumasa
Iwasaki, Hiroshi
Natsumi, Yuta
Minagawa, Hiroshi
Yamada, Hiroshi
Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block
title Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block
title_full Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block
title_fullStr Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block
title_full_unstemmed Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block
title_short Vascular Evaluation around the Cervical Nerve Roots during Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Nerve Root Block
title_sort vascular evaluation around the cervical nerve roots during ultrasound-guided cervical nerve root block
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7002060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32039292
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2019-0006
work_keys_str_mv AT muratashizumasa vascularevaluationaroundthecervicalnerverootsduringultrasoundguidedcervicalnerverootblock
AT iwasakihiroshi vascularevaluationaroundthecervicalnerverootsduringultrasoundguidedcervicalnerverootblock
AT natsumiyuta vascularevaluationaroundthecervicalnerverootsduringultrasoundguidedcervicalnerverootblock
AT minagawahiroshi vascularevaluationaroundthecervicalnerverootsduringultrasoundguidedcervicalnerverootblock
AT yamadahiroshi vascularevaluationaroundthecervicalnerverootsduringultrasoundguidedcervicalnerverootblock