Citations

Background Inconsistent nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques hinder scientific communication and engender confusion; this in turn has implications for research, education and clinical implementation of regional anesthesia. Having produced standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques, we aimed to similarly do so for upper and lower limb peripheral nerve blocks. Methods We performed a three-round Delphi international consensus study to generate standardized names and anatomical descriptions of upper and lower limb regional anesthetic techniques. A long list of names and anatomical description of blocks of upper and lower extremities was produced by the members of the steering committee. Subsequently, two rounds of anonymized voting and commenting were followed by a third virtual round table to secure consensus for items that remained outstanding after the first and second rounds. As with previous methodology, strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%–74% agreement. Results A total of 94, 91 and 65 collaborators participated in the first, second and third rounds, respectively. We achieved strong consensus for 38 names and 33 anatomical descriptions, and weak consensus for five anatomical descriptions. We agreed on a template for naming peripheral nerve blocks based on the name of the nerve and the anatomical location of the blockade and identified several areas for future research. Conclusions We achieved consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques for upper and lower limb nerve blocks, and recommend using this framework in clinical and academic practice. This should improve research, teaching and learning of regional anesthesia to eventually improve patient care.

AbstractBackgroundThe orientation of facial ligaments changes with increasing age due to the loss of bony support. Soft tissue filler injections placed in close proximity to facial ligaments can alter their orientation to help achieve an improved and younger aesthetic appearance.ObjectiveTo assess the anatomic and aesthetic effects of a standardized injection with soft tissue filler placed directly inferior to the orbicularis retaining ligament in the infraorbital region.MethodsA total of 163 patients with signs of infraorbital aging were treated with a standardized soft tissue filler injection into and in close proximity to the orbicularis retaining ligament (ORL). 2D frontal images of the infraorbital region were rated by eleven blinded and independent raters with regards to the aesthetic appearance of the infraorbital region before and after the standardized injection treatment.ResultsThe aesthetic appearance of the entire infraorbital region (lid‐cheek junction) was rated before and after the treatment. The severity of the tear trough (medial aspect of the infraorbital region) as well as the hollowing of the lateral aspect of the infraorbital region also was rated before and after the treatment. Aesthetic improvement was statistically significant when evaluated by the blinded raters, the treating physician, and the patients. All the results were “very much improved” compared to baseline.ConclusionThe effectiveness of this injection technique is thought to be due to the strategic placement of soft tissue filler that helps to reposition facial ligaments that have changed their orientation during the aging process.

Background There is heterogeneity in the names and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques. This may have adverse consequences on education, research, and implementation into clinical practice. We aimed to produce standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques. Methods We conducted an international consensus study involving experts using a three-round Delphi method to produce a list of names and corresponding descriptions of anatomical targets. After long-list formulation by a Steering Committee, the first and second rounds involved anonymous electronic voting and commenting, with the third round involving a virtual round table discussion aiming to achieve consensus on items that had yet to achieve it. Novel names were presented where required for anatomical clarity and harmonization. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50% to 74% agreement. Results Sixty expert Collaborators participated in this study. After three rounds and clarification, harmonization, and introduction of novel nomenclature, strong consensus was achieved for the names of 16 block names and weak consensus for four names. For anatomical descriptions, strong consensus was achieved for 19 blocks and weak consensus was achieved for one approach. Several areas requiring further research were identified. Conclusions Harmonization and standardization of nomenclature may improve education, research, and ultimately patient care. We present the first international consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of blocks of the abdominal wall, chest wall, and paraspinal blocks. We recommend using the consensus results in academic and clinical practice.