↓ Skip to main content

Minimum anesthetic volume in regional anesthesia by using ultrasound-guidance

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Minimum anesthetic volume in regional anesthesia by using ultrasound-guidance
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology, June 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.05.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandro Di Filippo, Silvia Falsini, Chiara Adembri

Abstract

The ultrasound guidance in regional anesthesia ensures the visualization of needle placement and the spread of Local Anesthetics. Over the past few years there was a substantial interest in determining the Minimum Effective Anesthetic Volume necessary to accomplish surgical anesthesia. The precise and real-time visualization of Local Anesthetics spread under ultrasound guidance block may represent the best requisite for reducing Local Anesthetics dose and Local Anesthetics-related effects. We will report a series of studies that have demonstrated the efficacy of ultrasound guidance blocks to reduce Local Anesthetics and obtain surgical anesthesia as compared to block performed under blind or electrical nerve stimulation technique. Unfortunately, the results of studies are widely divergent and not seem to indicate a dose considered effective, for each block, in a definitive way; but it is true that, through the use of ultrasound guidance, it is possible to reduce the dose of anesthetic in the performance of anesthetic blocks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
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 > Doctoral Student 6 18%
Researcher 6 18%
Other 5 15%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 64%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Unknown 10 30%