CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02382744Updated Apr 2, 2018Results posted

Saphenous Nerve Block for Foot and Ankle Surgery

An interventional study of Ultrasound Guidance and Ultrasound guidance + nerve stimulation in Saphenous Nerve Block, sponsored by University of British Columbia. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 19 Years to 80 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-04-02.

Sponsored by University of British Columbia · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
80
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
19 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery have the option of having a nerve block administered by their Anesthesiologist. The nerve block numbs the foot and results in less post-operative nausea and vomiting, and better pain control. Two different techniques for blocking the saphenous nerve to the foot have been described and are both commonly used at St. Paul's hospital. The goal of this study is to compare the success rates of these two techniques.

Read the detailed description

Purpose / Hypothesis This clinical study is a prospective, controlled, randomized, single-blinded trial designed to investigate the hypothesis that ultrasound-guided blockade of the saphenous nerve in conjunction with nerve stimulation has a higher success rate when compared to ultrasound alone. These research interventions represent what is considered to be an improvement on the standard practice at St. Paul's, which is to block the saphenous nerve with one of any number of saphenous nerve blocks, using a number of different techniques (i.e. ultrasound-guided, nerve stimulation, blind field block); the effectiveness of which has been inconsistent. The purpose of this study is to identify if one technique has a great success rate over another, which would ultimately result in increased success rates of saphenous nerve blocks and patient care.

Study Design The study will be a randomized, single-blinded trial of 80 subjects who are undergoing foot and ankle surgery. Informed consent will be obtained from all study subjects. Subjects will be randomized to one of two saphenous nerve block techniques to be administered by an experienced regional anesthesiologist at St. Paul's Hospital. Once the nerve block is completed the success will be evaluated by an investigator blinded to the procedure. Once the 30min evaluation is completed anesthetic care will be provided according to regular institutional practice and at the discretion of the attending anesthesiologist. The subject will then be contacted at 2 and 7 days after block administration to assess for delayed complications.

Intravenous access will be gained and non-invasive blood pressure measurements will be recorded every five minutes. Continuous electrocardiography and oxygen saturation monitoring will be maintained throughout the procedure and for at least 60 minutes afterwards. Light sedation will be provided, with the goal of maintaining verbal contact with the subject throughout the procedure. Where clinically appropriate, the study block may be preceded by an ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block at the discretion of the attending anesthesiologist.

Saphenous nerve blockade will be preformed using a transsartorial approach. Subjects in both groups will be positioned prone. The ultrasound probe will be placed in the transverse plane on the medial aspect of the thigh 3-5cm cephalad to the superior border of the patella (area marked). An attempt will then be made to identify the saphenous nerve, which runs deep to the sartorius muscle within the subsartorial fascial plane. The nerve will appear hyperechoic, round or oval shaped. The anesthesiologist will have a maximum scan time of 3 minutes prior to needle entry. Up to 5 mL of 1% Lidocaine will be used for skin infiltration of the injection site. The block will then be preformed as to the protocols below depending on group allocation. A thirty minute evaluation of the saphenous nerve block will occur during the normal monitoring period after the placement of a block.

Following completion of the thirty-minute evaluation, anesthetic care will be provided according to regular institutional practice and at the discretion of the attending anesthesiologist. This may include spinal or general anesthesia.

All subjects will be contacted by telephone at two and seven days post procedure for a follow up interview to assess for delayed complications associated with the procedure.

The medications used for the nerve blocks in the study will include only ropivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 1%. For subject sedation, midazolam and fentanyl will be used. None of these medications are considered study drugs; rather they are commonly used anesthetic medications. While used in the study, these drugs themselves are not being investigated. The same medications will be used on subjects not enrolled in the study.

Study Treatment Group 1 - Saphenous nerve block using ultrasound guidance The needle will be placed with the needle tip in close proximity (1-2 mm) of the target structures (the saphenous nerve if visible or in the subsartorial facial plane of the sartorius muscle if the nerve is not visible). A total of 10 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine will be used for the block. Before injection of any local anesthetic a gentle aspiration will be preformed, with a second aspiration after 5 mL of ropivacaine has been injected. Once injection of local anesthetic has commenced small needle adjustments are allowed to enhance spread. This will be done at the discretion of the regional anesthesiologist performing the block.

Study Treatment Group 2 - Saphenous nerve blockade using ultrasound guidance and nerve stimulation The needle will be place with the needle tip in close proximity (1-2 mm) of the target structure (the saphenous nerve if visible or in the subsartorial fascial plane if the nerve is not visible). The Pajunk MultiStim SENSOR nerve stimulator will then be turned on, starting at 1.0 milliamp (mA) until a tapping sensation is elicited in the medial or anterior aspect of the ankle. The amplitude of the nerve stimulator will then be gradually decreased with maintenance of the tapping sensation by making small adjustments in needle location. The end-point for nerve localization will be a tapping sensation in the area of the medial malleolus at ≤ 0.6 mA. The anesthesiologist will have a maximum search time of 5 minutes from needle entry to elicitation of the tapping sensation. Once a tapping sensation is elicited in the ≤ 0.6 mA range, 10 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine will be injected at the site. If a tapping sensation is elicited but not ≤ 0.6 mA within 5 minutes then 10 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine will be injected at the site where the lowest amplitude tapping sensation was elicited. If no tapping sensation is elicited from the subject after 5 minutes, an injection of 10 mL of ropivacaine will be made below the Sartorius muscle in the subsartorial fascial plane. Before injection of any local anesthetic a gentle aspiration will be preformed, with a second aspiration after 5 mL of ropivacaine has been injected. Once injection of local anesthetic has commenced small needle adjustments are allowed to enhance spread. This will be done at the discretion of the regional anesthesiologist performing the block.

02

Conditions studied

  • Saphenous Nerve Block

Keywords

  • Saphenous Nerve
  • Nerve Block
  • Ultrasound guided
  • Neurostimulation
  • Regional Anesthesia
  • Ropivacaine
  • Foot Surgery
  • Nerve Stimulation
  • Ankle Surgery
03

In context

Lead sponsor

University of British Columbia is the lead sponsor of 1,309 studies on the registry; 253 are open to participants now.

Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 1 (17%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
19 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  1. Subjects undergoing foot and ankle surgery
  2. Aged 19-80
  3. Normal sensation in saphenous nerve distribution in both legs
  4. Provided written informed consent.
  5. Body Mass Index \<38 kg/m2

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Subject refusal
  2. A known history of allergy, sensitivity or any other form of reaction to local anesthetics of amide type
  3. Suspected inability to comply with study procedures, including language difficulties or medical history and/or concomitant disease (i.e. skin infection as the site of needle insertion), as judged by the investigator. Reason for exclusion will be recorded.
  4. A neurological and/or vascular condition, which may preclude eligibility for peripheral nerve blockade (i.e. peripheral neuropathy) as judged by the investigator. Reason for exclusion will be recorded.
  5. Subjects on therapeutic anticoagulation or coagulopathy at the time of nerve blockade.
  6. Previous inclusion in this study.
  7. Participation in other clinical studies during this study or in the 14 days prior to admission to this study.
  8. Surgeon refusal (e.g. the surgeon does not want a nerve block for the subject). Reason for exclusion will be recorded.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
80 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Ultrasound Guidance

    Saphenous nerve block placed using ultrasound guidance alone

    Device: Ultrasound Guidance

  • Experimental
    Ultrasound Guidance + nerve stimulation

    Saphenous nerve block placed using ultrasound guidance and nerve stimulation

    Device: Ultrasound guidance + nerve stimulation

Interventions

  • DeviceUltrasound Guidance

    Ultrasound guidance will be used to place a saphenous nerve block

  • DeviceUltrasound guidance + nerve stimulation

    Ultrasound guidance and nerve stimulation will be used to place a saphenous nerve block

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Block Success

    Complete absence of sensation to pinprick at two different anatomic areas of the saphenous nerve at thirty minutes

    Time frame: 30 minutes post nerve block

Secondary outcomes

  1. Block Failure Rate

    Persistent sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at 30 minutes (i.e., absence of any evidence of blockade \[decreased or complete absence of sensation\] at both areas: normal sensation.

    Time frame: 30 minutes post nerve block

  2. Any Evidence of Blockade (Decreased or Complete Absence of Sensation)

    Participants with any evidence of blockade (decreased or complete absence of sensation) at the two different anatomic areas in the distribution of the saphenous nerve (2 cm proximal to the medial malleolus and 10 cm distal to the medial tibial condyle)

    Time frame: 30 min

  3. Incomplete Block Rate

    incomplete \[decreased only\] loss of sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at 30 minutes at both areas of assessment

    Time frame: 30 minutes post nerve block

  4. Speed of Onset for Nerve Block (Complete Blockade)

    Median (Kaplan-Meier curve "survival") time required to reach complete absence of sensation to pinprick at the two different anatomic areas of assessment in the distribution of the saphenous nerve (2 cm proximal to the medial malleolus and 10 cm distal to the medial condyle of the tibia).

    Time frame: 30 minutes post nerve block

  5. Rate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation

    successful elicitation of any "tapping" sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution within the 5 min stimulation time limit

    Time frame: 5 minutes

  6. Mean Minimum Stimulation Current

    the mean minimum stimulation current magnitude to elicit "tapping" sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution (cf. 3.2.3 below)

    Time frame: 5 minutes

  7. Rate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation at < 0.6 Milliampere (mA)

    Successful elicitation of "tapping" sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at ≤ 0.6 mA

    Time frame: 5 minutes

  8. Time Required to Administer Block

    The time required for the block to be completed (from scanning to removal of needle)

    Time frame: 10 minutes

  9. Immediate Complications

    Any complications as a result of block placement (e.g. local anesthetic toxicity, hematoma, pain etc.)

    Time frame: 60 minutes post block completion

  10. Delayed Complications

    Any complication as a results of nerve block placement (e.g. persistent paresthesia, nerve injury)

    Time frame: 7 days post operative

07

Results

Posted Apr 2, 2018

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve Stimulation
Started4040
Allocated4040
Analyzed4040
Completed4040
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryBlock Success

Complete absence of sensation to pinprick at two different anatomic areas of the saphenous nerve at thirty minutes

Time frame:
30 minutes post nerve block
Reported as:
Number · participants
Block Success
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Block Success1822
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · Fisher Exact · p = 0.25 (One-sided P-value based on the lack of plausibility that additional nerve stimulation would worsen sensory blockade rates.) · Difference between proportions (%): 10.0 · 95% CI -11.9 to 31.9
SecondaryBlock Failure Rate

Persistent sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at 30 minutes (i.e., absence of any evidence of blockade \[decreased or complete absence of sensation\] at both areas: normal sensation.

Time frame:
30 minutes post nerve block
Reported as:
Number · participants
Block Failure Rate
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Normal sensation13
Decreased or no sensation3937
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · Fisher Exact · p = 0.62 (Two-sided P-value)
SecondaryAny Evidence of Blockade (Decreased or Complete Absence of Sensation)

Participants with any evidence of blockade (decreased or complete absence of sensation) at the two different anatomic areas in the distribution of the saphenous nerve (2 cm proximal to the medial malleolus and 10 cm distal to the medial tibial condyle)

Time frame:
30 min
Reported as:
Number · participants
Any Evidence of Blockade (Decreased or Complete Absence of Sensation)
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Any Evidence of Blockade (Decreased or Complete Absence of Sensation)3937
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · Fisher Exact · p = 0.62
SecondaryIncomplete Block Rate

incomplete \[decreased only\] loss of sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at 30 minutes at both areas of assessment

Time frame:
30 minutes post nerve block
Reported as:
Number · participants
Incomplete Block Rate
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Decreased sensation2115
Normal or no sensation1925
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · Fisher Exact · p = 0.26 (Two-sided P-value)
SecondarySpeed of Onset for Nerve Block (Complete Blockade)

Median (Kaplan-Meier curve "survival") time required to reach complete absence of sensation to pinprick at the two different anatomic areas of assessment in the distribution of the saphenous nerve (2 cm proximal to the medial malleolus and 10 cm distal to the medial condyle of the tibia).

Time frame:
30 minutes post nerve block
Reported as:
Median · Minutes
Speed of Onset for Nerve Block (Complete Blockade)
MinutesUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Speed of Onset for Nerve Block (Complete Blockade)25.0 (20.0 to 30.0)17.5 (15.0 to 25.0)
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · Log Rank · p = 0.12 · "median survival" ratio: 0.70 · 95% CI 0.38 to 1.31Numerator, group "Ultrasound Guidance"; denominator, group, "Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation"
SecondaryRate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation

successful elicitation of any "tapping" sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution within the 5 min stimulation time limit

Time frame:
5 minutes
Reported as:
Number · participants
Rate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation
participantsUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Rate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation32
SecondaryMean Minimum Stimulation Current

the mean minimum stimulation current magnitude to elicit "tapping" sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution (cf. 3.2.3 below)

Time frame:
5 minutes
Reported as:
Mean · mA
Mean Minimum Stimulation Current
mAUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Mean Minimum Stimulation Current0.39 (0.31 to 0.48)
SecondaryRate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation at < 0.6 Milliampere (mA)

Successful elicitation of "tapping" sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at ≤ 0.6 mA

Time frame:
5 minutes
Reported as:
Number · participants
Rate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation at < 0.6 Milliampere (mA)
participantsUltrasound Guidance and Nerve Stimulation
Rate of Success of Elicitation of a Tapping Sensation at < 0.6 Milliampere (mA)25
SecondaryTime Required to Administer Block

The time required for the block to be completed (from scanning to removal of needle)

Time frame:
10 minutes
Reported as:
Mean · s
Time Required to Administer Block
sUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Time Required to Administer Block207 ± 76314 ± 125
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · t-test, 2 sided · p = <0.0001 · Difference between means (s): 107 · 95% CI 61 to 153
SecondaryImmediate Complications

Any complications as a result of block placement (e.g. local anesthetic toxicity, hematoma, pain etc.)

Time frame:
60 minutes post block completion
Reported as:
Number · participants
Immediate Complications
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Local anesthetic systemic toxicity00
Hematoma00
Pain on needle manipulation10
Paresthesia32
Positive aspiration (of blood)01
Pruritus of the blocked leg in saph. n. distrib.10
Transient increase in pain in medial malleolus10
SecondaryDelayed Complications

Any complication as a results of nerve block placement (e.g. persistent paresthesia, nerve injury)

Time frame:
7 days post operative
Reported as:
Number · participants
Delayed Complications
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Paresthesia01
Other00
Post-hocSpeed of Onset for Any Blockade in the Area 2 cm Proximal to the Medial Malleolus Only

Median (Kaplan-Meier curve "survival") time required to reach any evidence of sensory blockade (decreased or complete absence of sensation) in the area 2 cm proximal to the medial malleolus only

Time frame:
30 min
Reported as:
Median · Minutes
Speed of Onset for Any Blockade in the Area 2 cm Proximal to the Medial Malleolus Only
MinutesUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
Speed of Onset for Any Blockade in the Area 2 cm Proximal to the Medial Malleolus Only30.0 (20.0 to 30.0)17.5 (15.0 to 25.0)
Statistical analysis
  • Ultrasound Guidance vs Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation · Log Rank · p = 0.02 · "median survival" ratio: 0.58 · 95% CI 0.37 to 0.93Numerator, group "Ultrasound Guidance"; denominator, group, "Ultrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation"
Post-hocSensory Blockade Scores by Individual Assessment Area: Medial Malleolus

Sensation to pinprick with an 18 gauge blunt needle was assessed individually at the two different anatomic areas in the distribution of the saphenous nerve: Here, the results are reported for the area 2 cm proximal to the medial malleolus only

Time frame:
30 min
Reported as:
Number · participants
Sensory Blockade Scores by Individual Assessment Area: Medial Malleolus
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
2 = absent sensation2431
1 = decreased sensation145
0 = normal sensation (no block)24
Post-hocSensory Blockade Scores by Individual Assessment Area: Medial Tibial Condyle

Sensation to pinprick with an 18 gauge blunt needle was assessed individually at the two different anatomic areas in the distribution of the saphenous nerve: Here, the results are reported for the area 10 cm distal to the medial tibial condyle only

Time frame:
30 min
Reported as:
Number · participants
Sensory Blockade Scores by Individual Assessment Area: Medial Tibial Condyle
participantsUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance + Nerve Stimulation
2 = absent sensation2123
1 = decreased sensation1714
0 = normal sensation (no block)23
Post-hocResponse Versus Lack of Response to Nerve Stimulation and Block Failure Rate

Percentage of block failure (persistent sensation in the saphenous nerve distribution at 30 minutes -- i.e., absence of any evidence of blockade \[decreased or complete absence of sensation\] at both areas: normal sensation) among participants in the Ultrasound Guidance and Nerve Stimulation group with response versus no response to nerve stimulation

Time frame:
30 min
Reported as:
Number · participants
Response Versus Lack of Response to Nerve Stimulation and Block Failure Rate
participantsResponders to Nerve StimulationNon-responders to Nerve Stimulation
Block failure (normal sensation)03
No block failure (decreased or no sensation)325
Statistical analysis
  • Responders to Nerve Stimulation vs Non-responders to Nerve Stimulation · Fisher Exact · p = 0.0057

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse event data were collected immediately (i.e., on the day of the intervention/postoperative day 0); on postoperative days 2 and 7, patients were contacted via telephone to enquire about the presence of any delayed complications. In case of presence of any delayed complications at the day 7 follow-up, patients were to be contacted every 7 days until symptom resolution, and further investigations and/or management were to be provided at this time.. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Ultrasound Guidance—0/40 (0%)3/40 (7.5%)
Ultrasound Guidance and Nerve Stimulation—0/40 (0%)2/40 (5%)
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventUltrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve Stimulation
Paresthesia (on regional nerve block needle manpulation/advancement)Injury, poisoning and procedural complications3/402/40

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Ultrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve StimulationTotal
Mean50 ± 1553 ± 1452 ± 15
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Ultrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve StimulationTotal
Female222951
Male181129
Body Mass Index
Body Mass Index(kg/m^2)Ultrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve StimulationTotal
Mean26 ± 325 ± 425 ± 4
American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status
American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status(participants)Ultrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve StimulationTotal
I or II373370
III to V3710
Type of surgery
Type of surgery(participants)Ultrasound GuidanceUltrasound Guidance and Nerve StimulationTotal
Foot/ankle joint reconstruction/fusion/arthrodesis152439
Arthroscopy/debridement7714
Mass/hardware removal9312
Fracture fixation538
Tendon repair/transfer426
Amputation011
08

Study locations

1 site
  • St. Paul's Hospital
    Vancouver, British Columbia V6Z 1Y6, Canada
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Tsui BC, Ozelsel T. Ultrasound-guided transsartorial perifemoral artery approach for saphenous nerve block. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009 Mar-Apr;34(2):177-8; author reply 178. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e31819a273e. No abstract available. PubMed 19282716 ↗
  • Horn JL, Pitsch T, Salinas F, Benninger B. Anatomic basis to the ultrasound-guided approach for saphenous nerve blockade. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009 Sep-Oct;34(5):486-9. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181ae11af. PubMed 19920424 ↗
  • Lopez AM, Sala-Blanch X, Magaldi M, Poggio D, Asuncion J, Franco CD. Ultrasound-guided ankle block for forefoot surgery: the contribution of the saphenous nerve. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012 Sep-Oct;37(5):554-7. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3182611483. PubMed 22854395 ↗
  • Chen J, Lesser J, Hadzic A, Resta-Flarer F. The importance of the proximal saphenous nerve block for foot and ankle surgery. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2013 Jul-Aug;38(4):372. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e318295596a. No abstract available. PubMed 23788076 ↗
  • Head SJ, Leung RC, Hackman GP, Seib R, Rondi K, Schwarz SK. Ultrasound-guided saphenous nerve block--within versus distal to the adductor canal: a proof-of-principle randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2015 Jan;62(1):37-44. doi: 10.1007/s12630-014-0255-1. Epub 2014 Oct 22. PubMed 25337966 ↗
  • Benzon HT, Sharma S, Calimaran A. Comparison of the different approaches to saphenous nerve block. Anesthesiology. 2005 Mar;102(3):633-8. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200503000-00023. PubMed 15731603 ↗
  • Chi J, Greensmith JE. Saphenous nerve block technique with neurostimulation. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2007 Nov-Dec;32(6):548-9. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2007.08.007. No abstract available. PubMed 18035315 ↗
  • Comfort VK, Lang SA, Yip RW. Saphenous nerve anaesthesia--a nerve stimulator technique. Can J Anaesth. 1996 Aug;43(8):852-7. doi: 10.1007/BF03013038. PubMed 8840065 ↗
  • van der Wal M, Lang SA, Yip RW. Transsartorial approach for saphenous nerve block. Can J Anaesth. 1993 Jun;40(6):542-6. doi: 10.1007/BF03009739. PubMed 8403121 ↗
  • Montgomery SH, Shamji CM, Yi GS, Yarnold CH, Head SJ, Bell SC, Schwarz SK. Effect of Nerve Stimulation Use on the Success Rate of Ultrasound-Guided Subsartorial Saphenous Nerve Block: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2017 Jan/Feb;42(1):25-31. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000522. PubMed 27902645 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 2, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02382744
Lead sponsor
University of British Columbia
Responsible party
Scott Bell (Dr. Scott Bell, University of British Columbia) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 9, 2015
Start date
Feb 2015
Primary completion
Oct 2015
Completion
Oct 2015
Results posted
Apr 2, 2018
Last update
Apr 2, 2018

Study contacts

Scott Bell, MD
principal investigator · University of British Columbia

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion