Application of ultrasound guidance in the oral and maxillofacial nerve block

Introduction Nerve block technology is widely used in clinical practice for pain management. Conventional nerve localization methods, which only rely on palpation to identify anatomical landmarks, require experienced surgeons and can be risky. Visualization technologies like ultrasound guidance can help prevent complications by helping surgeons locate anatomical structures in the surgical area and by guiding the operation using different kinds of images. There are several important and complex anatomical structures in the oral and maxillofacial regions. The current article reviews the application of ultrasound guidance in oral and maxillofacial nerve blocks. Methods We searched the literature on the use of ultrasound guidance for the main nerve block techniques in the oral and maxillofacial regions using both PubMed and MEDLINE and summarized the findings. Results and Discussion A review of the literature showed that ultrasound guidance improves the safety and effectiveness of several kinds of puncture procedures, including nerve blocks. There are two approaches to blocking the mandibular nerve: intraoral and extraoral. This review found that the role of ultrasound guidance is more important in the extraoral approach. There are also two approaches to the blocking of the maxillary nerve and the trigeminal ganglion under ultrasound guidance: the superazygomatic approach and the infrazygomatic approach. The infrazygomatic approach can be further divided into the anterior approach and the posterior approach. It is generally believed that the anterior approach is safer and more effective. This review found that the effectiveness and safety of most oral and maxillofacial nerve block operations can be improved through the use of ultrasound guidance.

Decompression of the suprascapular nerve at the suprascapular notch under combined arthroscopic and ultrasound guidance

Decompression of the suprascapular nerve (SSNe) at the suprascapular notch (SSNo) is usually performed with an arthroscopic procedure. This technique is well described but locating the nerve is complex because it is deeply buried and surrounded by soft tissue. We propose to combine ultrasound and arthroscopy (US-arthroscopy) to facilitate nerve localization, exposure and release. The main objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of this technique. This is an experimental, cadaveric study, carried out on ten shoulders. The first step of our technique is to locate the SSNo using an ultrasound scanner. Then an arthroscope is introduced under ultrasound control to the SSNo. A second portal is then created to dissect the pedicle and perform the ligament release. Ultrasound identification of the SSNo, endoscopic dissection and decompression of the nerve were achieved in 100% of cases. Ultrasound identification of the SSNo took an average of 3 min (± 4) while dissection and endoscopic release time took an average of 8 min (± 5). Ultrasound is an extremely powerful tool for non-invasive localization of nerves through soft tissues, but it is limited by the fact that tissue visualization is limited to the ultrasound slice plane, which is two-dimensional. On the other hand, arthroscopy (extra-articular) allows three-dimensional control of the surgical steps performed, but the locating of the nerve involves significant tissue detachment and a risk of damaging the nerve with the dissection. The combination of the two (US-arthroscopy) offers the possibility of combining the advantages of both techniques.

Decompression of the Suprascapular Nerve at the Superior Scapular Notch Under Combined Arthroscopic and Ultrasound (US) Guidance: US-Arthroscopy

Background: Decompression of the suprascapular nerve (SSNe) at the superior scapular notch (SSNo) is usually performed with an arthroscopic procedure. This technique is well described but locating the nerve is complex because it is deeply buried and surrounded by soft tissue. We propose to combine ultrasound and arthroscopy (US-arthroscopy) to facilitate nerve localization, exposure and release. The main objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of this technique. Methods: This is an experimental, cadaveric study, carried out on shoulders. The first step of our technique is to locate the SSNo using an ultrasound scanner. Then an arthroscope is introduced under ultrasound control to the SSNo. A second portal is then created to dissect the pedicle and perform the ligament release. Results: Ultrasound identification of the SSNo, endoscopic dissection and decompression of the nerve were achieved in 100% of cases. Ultrasound identification of the SSNo took an average of min (+/-4) while dissection and endoscopic release time took an average of min (+/-5). Conclusion: Ultrasound is an extremely powerful tool for non-invasive localization of nerves through soft tissues, but it is limited by the fact that tissue visualization is limited to the ultrasound slice plane, which is two-82 dimensional. On the other hand, arthroscopy (extra-articular) allows three-dimensional control of the surgical steps performed, but the locating of the nerve involves significant tissue detachment and a risk of damaging the nerve with the dissection. The combination of the two (US-arthroscopy) offers the possibility of combining the advantages of both techniques.

Decompression of the suprascapular nerve at the superior scapular notch under combined arthroscopic and ultrasound (US) guidance: US-arthroscopy

Background: Decompression of the suprascapular nerve (SSNe) at the superior scapular notch (SSNo) is usually performed with an arthroscopic procedure. This technique is well described but locating the nerve is complex because it is deeply buried and surrounded by soft tissue. We propose to combine ultrasound and arthroscopy (US-arthroscopy) to facilitate nerve localization, exposure and release. The main objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of this technique. Methods: This is an experimental, cadaveric study, carried out on 10 shoulders. The first step of our technique is to locate the SSNo using an ultrasound scanner. Then an arthroscope is introduced under ultrasound control to the SSNo. A second portal is then created to dissect the pedicle and perform the ligament release. Results: Ultrasound identification of the SSNo, endoscopic dissection and decompression of the nerve were achieved in 100% of cases. Ultrasound identification of the SSNo took an average of 3 min (+/-4) while dissection and endoscopic release time took an average of 8 min (+/-5). Conclusion: Ultrasound is an extremely powerful tool for non-invasive localization of nerves through soft tissues, but it is limited by the fact that tissue visualization is limited to the ultrasound slice plane, which is two-dimensional. On the other hand, arthroscopy (extra-articular) allows three-dimensional control of the surgical steps performed, but the locating of the nerve involves significant tissue detachment and a risk of damaging the nerve with the dissection. The combination of the two (US-arthroscopy) offers the possibility of combining the advantages of both techniques.

Sleeve-Shaped Neurothekeoma of the Ulnar Nerve: A Unique Case of a Still Unclear Pathological Entity

Background: Neurothekeomas are slow-growing, well-circumscribed benign neoplasms. They usually involve cutaneous or subcutaneous tissues. Although originally described as myxomas deriving from nerve sheath cells, their exact histological classification is still uncertain. Peripheral nerve localization is rarely reported. Here, we describe a unique case of sleeve-shaped neurothekeoma of the ulnar nerve, which was incidentally discovered during a cubital tunnel release surgery. Methods: A 57-year-old man was admitted at our institution with clinical, ultrasonographic, and electromyographic findings highly suggestive of cubital tunnel syndrome. During ulnar nerve decompression surgery, however, no bony or ligament compression was noticed, but a segment of the nerve wrapped by a thick sleeve-shaped tissue, which had no clear-cut cleavage plane from the nerve. Given this unexpected finding, the en bloc excision of the lesion was avoided. A nerve decompression with biopsy of the swelling portion of the lesion was performed instead. Results: Histological examination described abundant myxoid stroma, with epithelioid and ring-shaped cells arranged in cords, negative to S100 protein at immunohistochemical analysis. This pattern was suggestive of neurothekeoma. The patient showed improvement in hypermyotrophy and intrinsic weakness of the hand. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a sleeve-shaped neurothekeoma of the ulnar nerve. The exact pathological characterization of such rare entities remains uncertain. In case of peripheral nerve localization, and when a clear cleavage plane is absent, the correct management of these lesions should be that of simple nerve decompression followed by biopsy.