Nerve Injuries around the Foot and Ankle

Author(s):  
Wolf Schamberger
2021 ◽  
pp. 295-300
Author(s):  
Lorraine Boakye ◽  
Nia A. James ◽  
Cortez L. Brown ◽  
Stephen P. Canton ◽  
Devon M. Scott ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 107110072095207
Author(s):  
Oliver J. Gagne ◽  
Amar Cheema ◽  
Monther Abuhantash ◽  
Ron Ree ◽  
Murray Penner ◽  
...  

Background: Peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) have revolutionized distal extremity surgery reducing pain and improving hospital efficiency. Perineural dexamethasone has been administered with PNBs to prolong their effects, although the safety of dexamethasone has not been established in the literature. This study aimed to determine if the addition of dexamethasone affected the postoperative neurological sensory status for foot and ankle surgeries and the recovery of nerve injuries. We hypothesized that the rate of persistent nerve injury would be higher in the dexamethasone group. Methods: This is a retrospective observational cohort study of prospectively collected data of all patients from a single foot and ankle surgeon’s practice. Perineural dexamethasone was routinely used as an adjunct by the regional anesthesia group until a clinical trend of increased paresthesia was found on short-term follow-up, which led to the discontinuation of its use. In this study, the cohort that received dexamethasone with ropivacaine was compared with the cohort that received ropivacaine alone. The primary outcome was a separate sensory nerve status sheet that was completed for every distal nerve territory for every patient at their follow-up visits at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Univariate analysis and a logistic regression model were used to determine the association between dexamethasone and delayed nerve recovery. A total of 250 patients were included in the study, with 117 patients in the dexamethasone group and 133 in the ropivacaine-only group. Results: The rates of nerve injuries were not different between the groups (72 [62%] in the dexamethasone group vs 79 [59%] in the ropivacaine-only group). However, nerve injury symptoms were more likely to persist and not fully recover in the dexamethasone group ( n = 47, 65%) compared with the ropivacaine-only group ( n = 32, 41%) (OR, 2.12; P = .006). Conclusion: Perineural dexamethasone added to PNBs may be associated with delayed nerve recovery after foot and ankle surgery. It may be prudent to avoid its use until its full safety profile is established in larger prospective trials. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract The AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, does not provide a separate mechanism for rating spinal nerve injuries as extremity impairment; radiculopathy was reflected in the spinal rating process in Chapter 17, The Spine and Pelvis. Certain jurisdictions, such as the Federal Employee Compensation Act (FECA), rate nerve root injury as impairment involving the extremities rather than as part of the spine. This article presents an approach to rate spinal nerve impairments consistent with the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, methodology. This approach should be used only when a jurisdiction requires ratings for extremities and precludes rating for the spine. A table in this article compares sensory and motor deficits according to the AMA Guides, Sixth and Fifth Editions; evaluators should be aware of changes between editions in methodology used to assign the final impairment. The authors present two tables regarding spinal nerve impairment: one for the upper extremities and one for the lower extremities. Both tables were developed using the methodology defined in the sixth edition. Using these tables and the process defined in the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, evaluators can rate spinal nerve impairments for jurisdictions that do not permit rating for the spine and require rating for radiculopathy as an extremity impairment.


1990 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 331-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis X. Mendoza ◽  
Kenneth Main

1994 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 909-938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur K. Walling ◽  
Seth I. Gasser

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-166
Author(s):  
Naji S. Madi ◽  
Said Saghieh ◽  
Ahmad Salah Naja ◽  
Rachid K. Haidar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document