↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block for Analgesia During Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty for Dialysis Access

Overview of attention for article published in CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Brachial Plexus Block for Analgesia During Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty for Dialysis Access
Published in
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00270-016-1409-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emiko Chiba, Kohei Hamamoto, Michio Nagashima, Katsuhiko Matsuura, Tomohisa Okochi, Keisuke Tanno, Osamu Tanaka

Abstract

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB) for analgesia during percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for dialysis access. Twenty-one patients who underwent PTA for stenotic dialysis access shunts and who had previous experience of PTA without sedation, analgesia, and anesthesia were included. The access type in all patients was native arteriovenous fistulae in the forearm. Two radiologists performed US-guided ABPB for the radial and musculocutaneous nerves before PTA. The patients' pain scores were evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS) after PTA, and these were compared with previous sessions without US-guided ABPB. The patient's motor/sensory paralysis after PTA was also examined. The mean time required to achieve US-guided ABPB was 8 min. The success rate of this procedure was 100 %, and there were no significant complications. All 21 patients reported lower VAS with US-guided ABPB as compared to without the block (p < 0.01). All patients expressed the desire for an ABPB for future PTA sessions, if required. Transient motor paralysis occurred in 8 patients, but resolved in all after 60 min. US-guided ABPB is feasible and effective for analgesia in patients undergoing PTA for stenotic dialysis access sites. Level 4 (case series).

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 21%
Other 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 61%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 21%