CHAPTER 6 Peripheral nerve block materials
Nerve stimulators
In 1911, Stoffel demonstrated how a galvanic current could be applied to identify nerve fibers.1 A year later, Perthes described how the use of electrical stimulation could improve the safety of neural block in the practice of anesthesia.2
Nerve stimulation is a popular technique for the location and identification of nerve fibers, particularly in Europe.3 It was introduced into contemporary practice in 1973 by Montgomery and Raj against considerable opposition, particularly in the USA, where many practitioners advocated the dictum ‘no paresthesia, no anesthesia’.4,5 Nerve stimulation, through the intentional avoidance of direct contact with the nerve fiber, aims to reduce the risk of neurologic complications. However, the relations between stimulating current, motor and sensory responses, success rates, and needle–nerve distances are far from clear in the clinical setting.6–8 The nerve stimulation method produces peripheral nerve injury in up to three cases in 10 000.9 In contrast, the transarterial approach to brachial plexus anesthesia produces nerve lesions in 0.8% of cases and the paresthesia approach in 2.8%.10,11 The following is a discussion on the theoretical as well as practical aspects of nerve stimulation and the equipment commonly used to locate nerves. The reader should remain cognizant of the fact that no definitive study outlining the exact nature of the relationship between the stimulating current and the observed responses in clinical practice exists to date.
Electrophysiology
The electrochemical nature of nerve fiber conduction renders it amenable to electrical stimulation. The strength–duration curve demonstrates the relation between the intensity and duration of current in peripheral nerve stimulation (Fig. 6.1).
The chronaxie of a motor nerve is less than that of a sensory nerve. In the clinical setting, therefore, a motor response may be elicited without stimulating pain fibers if the duration of impulse is short. Sensory nerves may also be identified using a nerve stimulator if the pulse duration is greater than 400 µs (Table 6.1).
Nerve fiber type | Chronaxie | |
---|---|---|
Cat sural nerve | Aα | 50–100 µs13 |
Aδ | 170 µs14 | |
Cat saphenous nerve | C | 400 µs15 |
(From Pither C, Prithvi R, Ford D. The use of peripheral nerve stimulators for regional anesthesia. A review of experimental characteristics, techniques and clinical applications. Reg Anesth 1985; 10; 49–58, with permission from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine.)
governs the relation between the stimulus intensity and the distance from the nerve. E is the current required, K a constant, Q the minimal current, and r the distance. The significance lies in the squaring of the distance. While one may thus approach the nerve through the progressive diminution of current, at distances greater than 0.5 cm from the nerve large currents are required; at greater than 2 cm, currents of up to 50 mA may be generated. These currents produce pain locally and require that appropriate care be taken in patients with intracardiac electrodes (Table 6.2).
In practice, U corresponds to the potential difference between the poles of the nerve stimulator; R corresponds to the internal resistance of the patient and the resistance of the cables. The negative electrode is connected to the needle and the positive to the patient’s skin via a gel electrode. Because the interior of a nerve at rest is negatively charged relative to the exterior, if the poles are reversed hyperpolarization of the nerve occurs; it is then necessary to apply a current of greater intensity to achieve the same motor response. These currents may be uncomfortable for the patient (Fig. 6.2, Table 6.3).
Anodal vs cathodal current required to stimulate peripheral nerve | Reference |
---|---|
∞ 4.57 | BeMent & Ranck, 196916 |
∞ 4.3 | Ford et al, 198417 |
(From12 Pither C, Prithvi R, Ford D. The use of peripheral nerve stimulators for regional anesthesia. A review of experimental characteristics, techniques and clinical applications. Reg Anesth 1985; 10; 49–58, with permission from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine.)