Incidence of genitofemoral nerve block during lumbar sympathetic block: comparison of two lumbar injection sites.

Regional anesthesia Pub Date : 1997-11-01
S C Sayson, S Ramamurthy, J Hoffman
{"title":"Incidence of genitofemoral nerve block during lumbar sympathetic block: comparison of two lumbar injection sites.","authors":"S C Sayson,&nbsp;S Ramamurthy,&nbsp;J Hoffman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Genitofemoral nerve (GFN) block is a known side effect of a lumbar sympathetic block (LSB), although the incidence has not been well documented. Furthermore, genitofemoral neuralgia can occur following neurolytic LSB. Because the level at which the GFN exits the psoas sheath varies, this study was designed to identify differences in the incidence of GFN block following LSB at the level of the second versus the fourth lumbar vertebrae.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients requiring LSB to evaluate chronic lower extremity pain were prospectively studied. Patients were injected at the second lumbar (L2 group) or fourth lumbar (L4 group) vertebral body depending on the location of the pain syndrome in the lower extremity. Lumbar sympathetic blocks were performed using 10 mL of a 0.5% bupivacaine solution with radiocontrast; spread of injectate was verified using fluoroscopy. An observer evaluating for presence of GFN block was blinded to the lumbar level of injection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty patients were enrolled (L2 group, n = 15; L4 group, n = 15). Spread of local anesthetic/radiocontrast solution was limited to approximately one vertebral body above and one below the target level. There was no difference in the ability to achieve a LSB; success rates were 66% and 73% using L2 and L4, respectively. The incidence of GFN block was 0% (0/15) in the L2 group versus 40% (6/15) in the L4 group; this was statistically significant (P = .017, Fisher's exact test).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The GFN is less likely to be blocked when the LSB is performed near the second lumbar vertebra as compared with the fourth lumbar vertebra.</p>","PeriodicalId":77347,"journal":{"name":"Regional anesthesia","volume":"22 6","pages":"569-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Genitofemoral nerve (GFN) block is a known side effect of a lumbar sympathetic block (LSB), although the incidence has not been well documented. Furthermore, genitofemoral neuralgia can occur following neurolytic LSB. Because the level at which the GFN exits the psoas sheath varies, this study was designed to identify differences in the incidence of GFN block following LSB at the level of the second versus the fourth lumbar vertebrae.

Methods: Patients requiring LSB to evaluate chronic lower extremity pain were prospectively studied. Patients were injected at the second lumbar (L2 group) or fourth lumbar (L4 group) vertebral body depending on the location of the pain syndrome in the lower extremity. Lumbar sympathetic blocks were performed using 10 mL of a 0.5% bupivacaine solution with radiocontrast; spread of injectate was verified using fluoroscopy. An observer evaluating for presence of GFN block was blinded to the lumbar level of injection.

Results: Thirty patients were enrolled (L2 group, n = 15; L4 group, n = 15). Spread of local anesthetic/radiocontrast solution was limited to approximately one vertebral body above and one below the target level. There was no difference in the ability to achieve a LSB; success rates were 66% and 73% using L2 and L4, respectively. The incidence of GFN block was 0% (0/15) in the L2 group versus 40% (6/15) in the L4 group; this was statistically significant (P = .017, Fisher's exact test).

Conclusions: The GFN is less likely to be blocked when the LSB is performed near the second lumbar vertebra as compared with the fourth lumbar vertebra.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腰交感神经阻滞时生殖股神经阻滞的发生率:两个腰椎注射部位的比较。
背景和目的:生殖股神经(GFN)阻滞是腰交感神经阻滞(LSB)的一种已知副作用,尽管其发生率尚未得到很好的记录。此外,生殖股神经痛可发生在神经溶解性LSB后。由于GFN退出腰肌鞘的水平不同,本研究旨在确定第二腰椎与第四腰椎LSB后GFN阻滞发生率的差异。方法:对需要LSB评估慢性下肢疼痛的患者进行前瞻性研究。根据疼痛综合征在下肢的位置,在第二腰椎(L2组)或第四腰椎(L4组)椎体注射。腰交感神经阻滞采用10ml 0.5%布比卡因溶液加放射线造影剂;通过透视检查证实了注射剂的扩散。评估GFN阻滞存在的观察者对腰椎注射水平不知情。结果:共纳入30例患者(L2组,n = 15;L4组,n = 15)。局麻药/造影剂的扩散被限制在目标水平上下各一个椎体。实现LSB的能力没有差异;L2和L4的成功率分别为66%和73%。L2组GFN阻滞的发生率为0%(0/15),而L4组为40% (6/15);这在统计学上是显著的(P = 0.017, Fisher精确检验)。结论:与在第四腰椎进行LSB相比,在第二腰椎附近进行LSB时,GFN被阻塞的可能性更小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Not everything that can be done should be done Thoracic combined spinal epidural anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a geriatric patient with ischemic heart disease and renal insufficiency Comparative evaluation of continuous intercostal nerve block or epidural analgesia on the rate of respiratory complications, intensive care unit, and hospital stay following traumatic rib fractures: a retrospective review Does epidural analgesia during labor affect the incidence of cesarean delivery? Optimizing spinal anesthesia for ambulatory surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1