header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Wrist & Hand

Intra-articular and portal infiltration versus wrist block for analgesia after arthroscopy of the wrist

a prospective RCT



Download PDF

Abstract

Wrist block has been used to provide pain relief for many procedures on the hand and wrist but its role in arthroscopy of the wrist remains unexplored. Chondrotoxicity has been a concern with the intra-articular infiltration of local anaesthetic. We aimed to evaluate and compare the analgesic effect of portal and wrist joint infiltration with a wrist block on the pain experienced by patients after arthroscopy of the wrist.

A prospective, randomised, double-blind trial was designed and patients undergoing arthroscopy of the wrist under general anaesthesia as a day case were recruited for the study. Levo-bupivacaine was used for both techniques. The effects were evaluated using a ten-point visual analogue scale, and the use of analgesic agents was also compared. The primary outcomes for statistical analyses were the mean pain scores and the use of analgesia post-operatively.

A total of 34 patients (63% females) were recruited to the portal and joint infiltration group and 32 patients (59% males) to the wrist block group. Mean age was 40.8 years in the first group and 39.7 years in the second group (p > 0.05). Both techniques provided effective pain relief in the first hour and 24 hours post-operatively but wrist block gave better pain scores at bedtime on the day of surgery (p = 0.007) and at 24 hours post-operatively (p = 0.006).

Wrist block provides better and more reliable analgesia in patients undergoing arthroscopy of the wrist without exposing patients to the risk of chondrotoxicity.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1250–6.


Correspondence should be sent to Mr Y. Agrawal; e-mail:

For access options please click here