ArticleCureus2021
Lateral Sagittal Versus Costoclavicular Approaches for Ultrasound-Guided Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block: A Comparison of Block Dynamics Through A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of costoclavicular with infraclavicular block for upper limb surgeries: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Hemidiaphragmatic paralysis after costoclavicular approach versus other brachial plexus blocks in upper limb surgery: a meta-analysis.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2023Pooled it
- Infraclavicular versus costoclavicular approaches to ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Pooled it
- Effects of different approaches of infraclavicular brachial plexus block on perfusion index and tissue perfusion.Annals of medicine · 2025Trial
- Comparing the clinical features of lateral and medial approaches of costoclavicular technique versus traditional lateral sagittal technique as infraclavicular brachial plexus block methods: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2024Trial
- Comparison of ultrasonography-guided lateral versus medial costoclavicular brachial plexus block in pediatric patients : A randomized clinical trial.Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024Trial
- Article
- Costoclavicular Brachial Plexus Block for Upper Limb Procedures: A Narrative Review of Efficacy and Safety.Cureus · 2026Review
- Costoclavicular versus lateral sagittal infraclavicular brachial plexus block for postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing upper limb orthopaedic surgery: A randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
- Comparison of the classical approach and costoclavicular approach of ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2024Article
- Ultrasound-Guided Brachial Plexus Block by Costoclavicular Space Approach: A Narrative Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction In this study, our objective was to compare the lateral sagittal infraclavicular block (LS-ICB) with the costoclavicular infraclavicular block (CC-ICB) for ultrasound (US)-guided infraclavicular brachial plexus block in terms of block dynamics as well as patient and surgeon satisfaction levels. Methods A total of 100 patients, falling under the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) I-III categories, who were aged 18-65 years and scheduled for elective forearm and hand surgery were enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly allocated to receive a US-guided LS-ICB or US‑guided CC-ICB. The local anesthetic (LA) agent used (20-ml 0.5% bupivacaine) was identical in all subjects. The block performance time and the motor and sensory block onset times were determined to be the primary outcomes. Results The block performance time and the sensory block onset time were shorter in the CC-ICB group compared to the LS-ICB group [median (interquartile range): three (2.5-3.3) vs. two (1.5-2.3) minutes, p: <0.001; five (4.4-6) vs. four (3.8-6) minutes, p = 0.022, respectively]. The number of needle redirections was lower in the CC-ICB [three (2.7-4) vs. two (one to two) times, p: <0.001]. The motor block onset time and the motor-sensory block times were similar in both groups. There were more patients with a complete sensory blockade at five and 10 minutes in the CC-ICB group than in the LS-ICB group (30% vs. 12%, p = 0.027; 66% vs. 26%, p: <0.001, respectively). No complications were observed with regard to both techniques, and patient and surgeon satisfaction levels observed were similar for both groups. Conclusion Based on our findings, the CC approach provided a shorter performance time and a faster onset of the sensory block compared to the LS approach. However, no complications were reported with respect to either technique, and similar patient and surgeon satisfaction levels were observed.
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.