Trial reportDer Anaesthesist2014
To what extent can local anesthetics be reduced for infraclavicular block with ultrasound guidance?
Trial report in Der Anaesthesist, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound guidance for upper and lower limb blocks.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- The evolving landscape of minimally invasive procedures in musculoskeletal diseases-Part II.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Clinical indications for image guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)-part III, nerves of the upper limb.European radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the adequacy of different amounts of local anesthetics (LA) in infraclavicular blockade (ICB) under ultrasonographic (US) guidance and neurostimulation and compare them to the conventional doses under neurostimulation (NS). MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this study 100 patients scheduled for upper limb surgery and suitable for ICB were randomly allocated to 1 of 5 groups: group NS (NS alone group 0.5 ml/kg LA), group FD (full-dose US group 0.5 ml/kg LA), group 30 (30% reduced dose LA 0.35 ml/kg), group 50 (0.25 ml/kg LA) and group 70 (0.15 ml/kg LA). The ICB was performed under US in conjunction with NS in all groups except group NS in which neurostimulation was used alone. When necessary local anesthetic supplementation to the operation site was administered during surgery and propofol infusion for sedation ensued. Evaluation of sensory and motor block was performed for each terminal nerve (i.e. radial, ulnar, median and musculocutaneous nerves). Block quality (assessing the need for rescue LA and propofol sedation) and duration of the block were documented.
resultsNone of the patients in the FD and 30 groups required any supplementation or sedation, whereas LA supplementation rates were 5% in group 50 and 10% in groups 70 and NS. The propofol sedation rates were 20% in group NS, 25% in group 50 and 40% in group 70. Sensory block was significantly better in groups FD, 30 and NS at 30 min. A complete block was achieved more rapidly in all nerve territories in the full-dose group (p = 0.0001). Block duration was longest in group FD and was significantly longer in group 30 than in the other two groups (p = 0.0001).
conclusionThe results show that US guidance is more effective in maintenance of successful ICB than neurostimulation guidance alone and a reduction of LA doses even to 70% of conventionally used doses seems possible with US guidance. This article is published in English.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.