Ultrasound guidance is frequently utilized for needle placement and observation of local anesthetic spread when performing peripheral nerve blocks. Although there is evidence that ultrasound technology can reduce complications, there are limitations to 2-dimensional (2-D) ultrasound. Three-dimensional (3-D) and especially real-time 3-D (4-D) ultrasound may allow for optimized and well tolerated needle positioning and enhanced observation of local anesthetic spread around the target structure. This article reviewed the current literature regarding the use of 3-D and 4-D ultrasound technology in a regional anesthesia setting.
Several investigations have utilized 3-D ultrasound as a tool to study anatomical spatial relationships, evaluate local anesthetic spread, or optimize nerve block needle or catheter positioning. However, this was mostly achieved by retrospectively generating a 3-D image after the performance of the actual nerve blocks or studying anatomy on volunteers. There are only a few case reports available demonstrating the feasibility of 4-D ultrasound for nerve block performance.
At present, there are limited data regarding the use of 3-D ultrasound and a complete lack of randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating the potential benefits of real-time 3-D (4-D) ultrasound. This may be in part due to technical limitations associated with these techniques.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2015.
All research outputs
#23,437,562
of 34,526,284 outputs
Outputs from Current opinion in anaesthesiology
#1,065
of 1,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,536
of 312,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current opinion in anaesthesiology
#13
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,526,284 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,804 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,381 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
