Background This cadaveric study investigated the maximum effective volume of dye in 90% of cases (MEV90), required to stain the suprascapular nerve while sparing the phrenic nerve during the performance of an anterior suprascapular nerve block.
Methods In cadaveric neck specimens, using ultrasound guidance, the block needle was advanced until its tip was positioned underneath the omohyoid muscle next to the suprascapular nerve. The dye was injected in order to achieve circumferential spread around the latter. Successful phrenic-sparing suprascapular nerve block was defined as the non-staining of the phrenic nerve on dissection. Volume assignment was carried out using a Biased Coin Design, whereby the volume of dye administered to each cadaveric specimen depended on the response of the previous one. In case of failure (ie, stained phrenic nerve), the next one received a lower volume (defined as the previous volume with a decrement of 2 mL). If the previous cadaveric specimen had a successful block (ie, non-stained phrenic nerve), the next one was randomized to a higher volume (defined as the previous volume with an increment of 2 mL), with a probability of b=0.11, or the same volume, with a probability of 1 – b=0.89.
Results Thirty-one cadavers (56 cadaveric neck specimens) were included in the study. Using isotonic regression and bootstrap CI, the MEV90 for phrenic-sparing anterior suprascapular nerve block was estimated to be 4.2 mL (95% CI 3.0 to 5.0 mL). The probability of a successful response was estimated to be 0.90 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.96).
Conclusion For ultrasound-guided anterior suprascapular nerve block, the MEV90 of dye required to spare the phrenic nerve is 4.2 mL. Further studies are required to correlate this finding with the MEV90 of local anesthetic in live subjects.
- nerve block
- upper extremity
Data availability statement
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors NM, PK, AS, PM, and PL participated in the planning, conception, design, conduct, reporting, acquisition of data, data analysis, and interpretation of data. DQT participated in the planning, conception, design, data analysis, and interpretation of data.
Funding This research received a grant from the Teacher Assistant or Research Assistant (TA/RA) Scholarship from the Graduate School of Chiang Mai University, and the Faculty of Medicine Research Fund (Grant No.014-2564) of Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.