Intravenous regional anesthesia: a review of common local anesthetic options and the use of opioids and muscle relaxants as adjuncts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
David Flamer, Philip WH PengDepartment of Anesthesia, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, CanadaPurpose: To provide a review of local anesthetic (LA) agents and adjuncts, opioids and muscle relaxants, and their intraoperative effects and postoperative outcomes in intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA).Source: A search for prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trials evaluating LA agents, opioids and muscle relaxants as adjuvants for IVRA, was conducted (MEDLINE®, Embase). Intraoperative benefits (onset/recovery of sensory and motor block, intraoperative analgesia, tourniquet pain), postoperative benefits (pain score, analgesic consumption, time to first analgesia), and side effects were recorded. A conclusion for overall benefit was made based on statistical significance and clinical relevance.Findings: Thirty-one studies were evaluated, with data collected on 1523 subjects. LA agents evaluated were lidocaine, ropivacaine, and prilocaine. Adjuncts evaluated were opioids (morphine, fentanyl, meperidine, sufentanil, tramadol) and muscle relaxants (pancuronium, atracurium, mivacurium, cisatacurium). There was good evidence that ropivacaine provided effective IVRA and improved postoperative analgesia. Lidocaine and prilocaine were effective LA agents, however they lacked postoperative benefits. Morphine, fentanyl, and meperidine as sole adjuncts did not demonstrate clinically significant benefits or result in an increased risk of side effects. Sufentanil data was limited, but appeared to provide faster onset of sensory block. Tramadol provided faster onset of sensory block and tourniquet tolerance, however postoperative benefits were not consistent and the risk of minor side effects increased. Muscle relaxants improved the quality of motor block, but at the expense of delayed motor recovery. The combination of fentanyl and muscle relaxants can achieve an equivalent quality of IVRA with 50% reduction in LA dose, but at the expense of a potentially slower onset of sensory block.Conclusion: Ropivacaine is effective for IVRA and improves postoperative analgesia. Muscle relaxants enhance the motor block and when combined with fentanyl allow for an equivalent quality of IVRA with 50% reduction in LA dose.Keywords: intravenous regional anesthesia, IVRA, adjuncts, local anesthetic, opioid, muscle relaxant
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".