Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
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.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05260736 (Comparison of Costoclavicular Lateral, Costoclavicular Medial and Lateral Sagittal Approaches to Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block in Upper Extremity Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Comparison of Costoclavicular Lateral, Costoclavicular Medial and Lateral Sagittal Approaches to Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Block in Upper Extremity Surgery
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Costoclavicular brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery: a narrative review.Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- Superior outcome with anterolateral approach in treating O'Driscoll type II ulnar coronoid process fractures: a retrospective analysis.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is aimed to compare the block onset times and performance features of costoclavicular techniques (medial and lateral approach) versus lateral sagittal technique.
methodsPatients were randomized into three groups. For costoclavicular techniques, ultrasound probe was placed parallel to clavicle obtaining nerve cords, axillary artery and axillary vein visual from lateral-to-medial, respectively. The block needle was advanced from lateral (Group CLB) or medial (Group CMB) to perform costoclavicular block. For lateral sagittal technique (Group LSB), ultrasound probe was placed sagittal and perpendicular below the coracoid process to obtain sagittal artery image with the cords around. Total 20 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine and 10 ml of 2% lidocaine were deposited for all groups. Sensory and motor block onset times, block performance properties, complications, and patient/surgeon satisfactions were investigated.
resultsAmong 56 patients, the primary outcome, sensory block onset time was shorter in Group CLB than Group CMB and Group LSB (10 [5-15], 10 [10-20], and 15 [10-15] minutes, respectively, p < 0.05). Motor block onset was also fastest in Group CLB (15 [10-20] mins for CLB, 20 [15-20] mins for LSB, and 22.5 [15-25] mins for CMB, p = 0.004). Block performance properties did not differ between the groups. The only complication observed was vascular puncture with an incidence of 28% in Group CMB.
conclusionsLateral approach costoclavicular technique provides fastest block onset than the other techniques. Considering the success and safety profile, this technique stands as a good alternative in clinical practice.
trial registrationThis study is prospectively registered to clinicaltrials.gov on 20/02/2022 (NCT05260736).
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.