Ultrasound compared with nerve stimulation guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US) vs nerve stimulation (NS) guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement. This meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomou...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 2013-10, Vol.111 (4), p.564-572 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 572 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 564 |
container_title | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA |
container_volume | 111 |
creator | Schnabel, A Meyer-Frießem, C.H. Zahn, P.K. Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M. |
description | The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US) vs nerve stimulation (NS) guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement.
This meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomous outcomes relative risks [RRs; 95% confidence intervals (CIs)] were calculated, while for continuous outcomes, mean differences (MDs; 95% CI) were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using the Revman® statistical software (Version 5.1).
Fifteen randomized controlled trials including 977 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Peripheral nerve catheters placed under US guidance showed a higher RR of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.02–1.27; P=0.02) for an overall successful block in comparison with NS. However, postoperative pain scales at movement (numeric rating scale: 0–10) were comparable between US- vs NS-guided peripheral nerve catheters 24 (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: −0.77 to 0.94; P=0.85) and 48 (MD: 1.0; 95% CI: −0.3 to 2.3; P=0.13) h after surgery. Patients receiving a US-guided peripheral nerve catheter had a lower RR of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.04–0.38; P=0.0002) for an accidental vascular puncture.
There is evidence that US-guided peripheral nerve catheters show a higher success rate and a lower risk for an accidental vascular puncture compared with NS guidance. However, this difference resulted only in marginally lower postoperative pain scores at rest. Nevertheless, these results were influenced by heterogeneity and should be interpreted with caution. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/bja/aet196 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1432615168</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0007091217323486</els_id><sourcerecordid>1432615168</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-7f741a132451564f16be2b37ce13b5df785f8f09e504935bb3a5e39475065be93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkMFqFTEUhoMo9lrd-ACSpQhjk0kyueNOitpCwY1dhzOZE29KJhmTTKU-gw9tyr26cvUfOB__4XyEvObsPWejuJju4AKw8nF4QnZcat4NWvOnZMcY0x0beX9GXpRyxxjX_aiek7NeaMmY7Hfk922oGUra4kxtWlbIONOfvh5oxHyPtFS_bAGqT5F-3_wM0SJ1KdMVs18PmCGcSAv1gBXbJoDFBWP9QIEuWKGDCOGh-EKToxninBb_Cx_vxZpTCG2s2UMoL8kz1wJfnfKc3H7-9O3yqrv5-uX68uNNZ8Wwr512WnLgopeKq0E6PkzYT0Jb5GJSs9N75faOjaiYHIWaJgEKxSi1YoOacBTn5O2xd83px4almsUXiyFAxLQVw6XoB674sG_ouyNqcyolozNr9gvkB8OZebRvmn1ztN_gN6febVpw_of-1d0AeQSwfXfvMZtiPTals89oq5mT_1_vH8yelmg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1432615168</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ultrasound compared with nerve stimulation guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Schnabel, A ; Meyer-Frießem, C.H. ; Zahn, P.K. ; Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schnabel, A ; Meyer-Frießem, C.H. ; Zahn, P.K. ; Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US) vs nerve stimulation (NS) guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement.
This meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomous outcomes relative risks [RRs; 95% confidence intervals (CIs)] were calculated, while for continuous outcomes, mean differences (MDs; 95% CI) were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using the Revman® statistical software (Version 5.1).
Fifteen randomized controlled trials including 977 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Peripheral nerve catheters placed under US guidance showed a higher RR of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.02–1.27; P=0.02) for an overall successful block in comparison with NS. However, postoperative pain scales at movement (numeric rating scale: 0–10) were comparable between US- vs NS-guided peripheral nerve catheters 24 (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: −0.77 to 0.94; P=0.85) and 48 (MD: 1.0; 95% CI: −0.3 to 2.3; P=0.13) h after surgery. Patients receiving a US-guided peripheral nerve catheter had a lower RR of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.04–0.38; P=0.0002) for an accidental vascular puncture.
There is evidence that US-guided peripheral nerve catheters show a higher success rate and a lower risk for an accidental vascular puncture compared with NS guidance. However, this difference resulted only in marginally lower postoperative pain scores at rest. Nevertheless, these results were influenced by heterogeneity and should be interpreted with caution.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0912</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/bja/aet196</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23740042</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>acute pain, regional techniques ; anaesthetic techniques, regional ; Catheterization, Peripheral - adverse effects ; Catheterization, Peripheral - methods ; Electric Stimulation - methods ; Humans ; Nerve Block - adverse effects ; Nerve Block - methods ; Pain, Postoperative - prevention & control ; Peripheral Nerves - diagnostic imaging ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; regional anaesthesia ; Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods</subject><ispartof>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2013-10, Vol.111 (4), p.564-572</ispartof><rights>2013 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-7f741a132451564f16be2b37ce13b5df785f8f09e504935bb3a5e39475065be93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-7f741a132451564f16be2b37ce13b5df785f8f09e504935bb3a5e39475065be93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23740042$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schnabel, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer-Frießem, C.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zahn, P.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Ultrasound compared with nerve stimulation guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</title><title>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</title><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><description>The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US) vs nerve stimulation (NS) guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement.
This meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomous outcomes relative risks [RRs; 95% confidence intervals (CIs)] were calculated, while for continuous outcomes, mean differences (MDs; 95% CI) were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using the Revman® statistical software (Version 5.1).
Fifteen randomized controlled trials including 977 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Peripheral nerve catheters placed under US guidance showed a higher RR of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.02–1.27; P=0.02) for an overall successful block in comparison with NS. However, postoperative pain scales at movement (numeric rating scale: 0–10) were comparable between US- vs NS-guided peripheral nerve catheters 24 (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: −0.77 to 0.94; P=0.85) and 48 (MD: 1.0; 95% CI: −0.3 to 2.3; P=0.13) h after surgery. Patients receiving a US-guided peripheral nerve catheter had a lower RR of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.04–0.38; P=0.0002) for an accidental vascular puncture.
There is evidence that US-guided peripheral nerve catheters show a higher success rate and a lower risk for an accidental vascular puncture compared with NS guidance. However, this difference resulted only in marginally lower postoperative pain scores at rest. Nevertheless, these results were influenced by heterogeneity and should be interpreted with caution.</description><subject>acute pain, regional techniques</subject><subject>anaesthetic techniques, regional</subject><subject>Catheterization, Peripheral - adverse effects</subject><subject>Catheterization, Peripheral - methods</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Nerve Block - adverse effects</subject><subject>Nerve Block - methods</subject><subject>Pain, Postoperative - prevention & control</subject><subject>Peripheral Nerves - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>regional anaesthesia</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods</subject><issn>0007-0912</issn><issn>1471-6771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNptkMFqFTEUhoMo9lrd-ACSpQhjk0kyueNOitpCwY1dhzOZE29KJhmTTKU-gw9tyr26cvUfOB__4XyEvObsPWejuJju4AKw8nF4QnZcat4NWvOnZMcY0x0beX9GXpRyxxjX_aiek7NeaMmY7Hfk922oGUra4kxtWlbIONOfvh5oxHyPtFS_bAGqT5F-3_wM0SJ1KdMVs18PmCGcSAv1gBXbJoDFBWP9QIEuWKGDCOGh-EKToxninBb_Cx_vxZpTCG2s2UMoL8kz1wJfnfKc3H7-9O3yqrv5-uX68uNNZ8Wwr512WnLgopeKq0E6PkzYT0Jb5GJSs9N75faOjaiYHIWaJgEKxSi1YoOacBTn5O2xd83px4almsUXiyFAxLQVw6XoB674sG_ouyNqcyolozNr9gvkB8OZebRvmn1ztN_gN6febVpw_of-1d0AeQSwfXfvMZtiPTals89oq5mT_1_vH8yelmg</recordid><startdate>20131001</startdate><enddate>20131001</enddate><creator>Schnabel, A</creator><creator>Meyer-Frießem, C.H.</creator><creator>Zahn, P.K.</creator><creator>Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131001</creationdate><title>Ultrasound compared with nerve stimulation guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</title><author>Schnabel, A ; Meyer-Frießem, C.H. ; Zahn, P.K. ; Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-7f741a132451564f16be2b37ce13b5df785f8f09e504935bb3a5e39475065be93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>acute pain, regional techniques</topic><topic>anaesthetic techniques, regional</topic><topic>Catheterization, Peripheral - adverse effects</topic><topic>Catheterization, Peripheral - methods</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Nerve Block - adverse effects</topic><topic>Nerve Block - methods</topic><topic>Pain, Postoperative - prevention & control</topic><topic>Peripheral Nerves - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>regional anaesthesia</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schnabel, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer-Frießem, C.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zahn, P.K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schnabel, A</au><au>Meyer-Frießem, C.H.</au><au>Zahn, P.K.</au><au>Pogatzki-Zahn, E.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ultrasound compared with nerve stimulation guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials</atitle><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><date>2013-10-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>111</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>564</spage><epage>572</epage><pages>564-572</pages><issn>0007-0912</issn><eissn>1471-6771</eissn><abstract>The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US) vs nerve stimulation (NS) guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement.
This meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomous outcomes relative risks [RRs; 95% confidence intervals (CIs)] were calculated, while for continuous outcomes, mean differences (MDs; 95% CI) were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using the Revman® statistical software (Version 5.1).
Fifteen randomized controlled trials including 977 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Peripheral nerve catheters placed under US guidance showed a higher RR of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.02–1.27; P=0.02) for an overall successful block in comparison with NS. However, postoperative pain scales at movement (numeric rating scale: 0–10) were comparable between US- vs NS-guided peripheral nerve catheters 24 (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: −0.77 to 0.94; P=0.85) and 48 (MD: 1.0; 95% CI: −0.3 to 2.3; P=0.13) h after surgery. Patients receiving a US-guided peripheral nerve catheter had a lower RR of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.04–0.38; P=0.0002) for an accidental vascular puncture.
There is evidence that US-guided peripheral nerve catheters show a higher success rate and a lower risk for an accidental vascular puncture compared with NS guidance. However, this difference resulted only in marginally lower postoperative pain scores at rest. Nevertheless, these results were influenced by heterogeneity and should be interpreted with caution.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>23740042</pmid><doi>10.1093/bja/aet196</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-0912 |
ispartof | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2013-10, Vol.111 (4), p.564-572 |
issn | 0007-0912 1471-6771 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1432615168 |
source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | acute pain, regional techniques anaesthetic techniques, regional Catheterization, Peripheral - adverse effects Catheterization, Peripheral - methods Electric Stimulation - methods Humans Nerve Block - adverse effects Nerve Block - methods Pain, Postoperative - prevention & control Peripheral Nerves - diagnostic imaging Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic regional anaesthesia Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods |
title | Ultrasound compared with nerve stimulation guidance for peripheral nerve catheter placement: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T01%3A14%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ultrasound%20compared%20with%20nerve%20stimulation%20guidance%20for%20peripheral%20nerve%20catheter%20placement:%20a%20meta-analysis%20of%20randomized%20controlled%20trials&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20anaesthesia%20:%20BJA&rft.au=Schnabel,%20A&rft.date=2013-10-01&rft.volume=111&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=564&rft.epage=572&rft.pages=564-572&rft.issn=0007-0912&rft.eissn=1471-6771&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/bja/aet196&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1432615168%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1432615168&rft_id=info:pmid/23740042&rft_els_id=S0007091217323486&rfr_iscdi=true |