Cargando…
Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants
Of the five nerves that innervate the foot, the one in which anesthetic blocking presents the greatest difficulty is the tibial nerve. The aim of this clinical trial was to establish a protocol for two tibial nerve block anesthetic techniques to later compare the anesthetic efficiency of retromalleo...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7312777/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32485917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113860 |
_version_ | 1783549809092722688 |
---|---|
author | Benimeli-Fenollar, María Montiel-Company, José M. Almerich-Silla, José M. Cibrián, Rosa Macián-Romero, Cecili |
author_facet | Benimeli-Fenollar, María Montiel-Company, José M. Almerich-Silla, José M. Cibrián, Rosa Macián-Romero, Cecili |
author_sort | Benimeli-Fenollar, María |
collection | PubMed |
description | Of the five nerves that innervate the foot, the one in which anesthetic blocking presents the greatest difficulty is the tibial nerve. The aim of this clinical trial was to establish a protocol for two tibial nerve block anesthetic techniques to later compare the anesthetic efficiency of retromalleolar blocking and supramalleolar blocking in order to ascertain whether the supramalleolar approach achieved a higher effective blocking rate. A total of 110 tibial nerve blocks were performed. Location of the injection site was based on a prior ultrasound assessment of the tibial nerve. The block administered was 3 mL of 2% mepivacaine. The two anesthetic techniques under study provided very similar clinical results. The tibial nerve success rate was 81.8% for the retromalleolar technique and 78.2% for the supramalleolar technique. No significant differences in absolute latency time (p = 0.287), percentage of effective nerve blocks (p = 0.634), anesthetic block duration (p = 0.895), or pain level during puncture (p = 0.847) were found between the two techniques. The greater ease in locating the tibial nerve at the retromalleolar approach could suggest that this is the technique of choice for tibial nerve blocking, especially in the case of professionals new to the field. The supramalleolar technique could be worth considering for those more experienced professionals. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7312777 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73127772020-06-26 Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants Benimeli-Fenollar, María Montiel-Company, José M. Almerich-Silla, José M. Cibrián, Rosa Macián-Romero, Cecili Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Of the five nerves that innervate the foot, the one in which anesthetic blocking presents the greatest difficulty is the tibial nerve. The aim of this clinical trial was to establish a protocol for two tibial nerve block anesthetic techniques to later compare the anesthetic efficiency of retromalleolar blocking and supramalleolar blocking in order to ascertain whether the supramalleolar approach achieved a higher effective blocking rate. A total of 110 tibial nerve blocks were performed. Location of the injection site was based on a prior ultrasound assessment of the tibial nerve. The block administered was 3 mL of 2% mepivacaine. The two anesthetic techniques under study provided very similar clinical results. The tibial nerve success rate was 81.8% for the retromalleolar technique and 78.2% for the supramalleolar technique. No significant differences in absolute latency time (p = 0.287), percentage of effective nerve blocks (p = 0.634), anesthetic block duration (p = 0.895), or pain level during puncture (p = 0.847) were found between the two techniques. The greater ease in locating the tibial nerve at the retromalleolar approach could suggest that this is the technique of choice for tibial nerve blocking, especially in the case of professionals new to the field. The supramalleolar technique could be worth considering for those more experienced professionals. MDPI 2020-05-29 2020-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7312777/ /pubmed/32485917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113860 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Benimeli-Fenollar, María Montiel-Company, José M. Almerich-Silla, José M. Cibrián, Rosa Macián-Romero, Cecili Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants |
title | Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants |
title_full | Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants |
title_fullStr | Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants |
title_full_unstemmed | Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants |
title_short | Tibial Nerve Block: Supramalleolar or Retromalleolar Approach? A Randomized Trial in 110 Participants |
title_sort | tibial nerve block: supramalleolar or retromalleolar approach? a randomized trial in 110 participants |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7312777/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32485917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17113860 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT benimelifenollarmaria tibialnerveblocksupramalleolarorretromalleolarapproacharandomizedtrialin110participants AT montielcompanyjosem tibialnerveblocksupramalleolarorretromalleolarapproacharandomizedtrialin110participants AT almerichsillajosem tibialnerveblocksupramalleolarorretromalleolarapproacharandomizedtrialin110participants AT cibrianrosa tibialnerveblocksupramalleolarorretromalleolarapproacharandomizedtrialin110participants AT macianromerocecili tibialnerveblocksupramalleolarorretromalleolarapproacharandomizedtrialin110participants |