Peripheral Foot Blockade Versus Popliteal Fossa Nerve Block: A Prospective Randomized Trial in 51 Patients

The majority of foot and ankle operations are performed on an outpatient basis and often under some form of regional anesthesia. In this prospective, randomized study of 51 patients undergoing elective unilateral forefoot procedures, we compared 2 different anesthetic techniques: the peripheral foot...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	The Journal of foot and ankle surgery Vol. 44; no. 5; pp. 354 - 357
Main Authors:	Migues, Atilio, Slullitel, Gaston, Vescovo, Anibal, Droblas, Felipe, Carrasco, Marina, Perrin Turenne, Hugo
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Baltimore, MD Elsevier Inc 01-09-2005 Data Trace
Subjects:	Anesthesia Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Anesthetics, Local - therapeutic use ankle block Biological and medical sciences Bupivacaine - therapeutic use Female foot Forefoot, Human - surgery General anesthesia. Technics. Complications. Neuromuscular blocking. Premedication. Surgical preparation. Sedation Humans Lidocaine - therapeutic use Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Nerve Block - methods Patient Satisfaction popliteal Prospective Studies regional anesthesia Sciatic Nerve ankle block popliteal foot regional anesthesia Lower limb Epidemiology Incidence Ankle joint Sole Regional anesthesia Anesthetic Surgery Quality Disease of the foot Complication Clinical trial Ambulatory Elective Human Postoperative Ankle Analgesia Treatment Unilateral Block Technique Comparative study Sciatic nerve
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	The majority of foot and ankle operations are performed on an outpatient basis and often under some form of regional anesthesia. In this prospective, randomized study of 51 patients undergoing elective unilateral forefoot procedures, we compared 2 different anesthetic techniques: the peripheral foot blockade and the popliteal sciatic nerve block. Variables assessed included the quality of surgical anesthesia, postoperative analgesia, and the incidence of postoperative complications. The anesthesia was classified as effective if it was the sole anesthetic technique for the forefoot surgery. We found successful results in both groups: 92% in the foot block group and 96% in the popliteal block group. Analysis of time required to perform the anesthetic procedure showed a significant difference between the 2 groups, with foot block being considerably faster (14.3 minutes vs 19.2 minutes for popliteal block) ( P = .0078). Foot block patients demonstrated 10.96 hours of analgesia, whereas popliteal block patients exhibited 14.32 hours ( P = .132). With a mean follow-up of 5.7 months, we did not find anesthesia-related complications in any of the patients. Both techniques showed a high level of safety and efficacy, with no significant difference detected between them. Our patients showed a high rate of satisfaction with both procedures (96% for foot block patients and 96.1% for popliteal block patients) and reported a good discharge disposition. These data show that both procedures are safe and effective anesthetic techniques and well suited to forefoot ambulatory surgery.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-News-1 ObjectType-Feature-3 content type line 23
ISSN:	1067-2516 1542-2224
DOI:	10.1053/j.jfas.2005.07.005