Detection of intraneural needle-placement with multiple frequency bioimpedance monitoring: a novel method

Håvard Kalvøy, Axel R Sauter, Håvard Kalvøy, Axel R Sauter

Abstract

Electrical impedance measurements have been used to detect intraneural needle placement, but there is still a lack of precision with this method. The purpose of the study was to develop a method for the discrimination of nerve tissue from other tissue types based on multiple frequency impedance measurements. Impedance measurements with 25 different frequencies between 1.26 and 398 kHz were obtained in eight pigs while placing the tip of a stimulation needle within the sciatic nerve and in other tissues. Various impedance variables and measurement frequencies were tested for tissue discrimination. Best tissue discrimination was obtained by using three different impedance parameters with optimal measurement frequencies: Modulus (126 kHz), Phase angle (40 kHz) and the Delta of the phase angle (between 126 and 158 kHz). These variables were combined in a Compound variable C. The area under the curve in a receiver operating characteristic was consecutively increased for the Modulus (78 %), Phase angle (86 %), Delta of the phase angle (94 %), and the Compound variable C (97 %), indicating highest specificity and sensitivity for C. An algorithm based on C was implemented in a real-time feasibility test and used in an additional test animal to demonstrate our new method. Discrimination between nerve tissue and other tissue types was improved by combining several impedance variables at multiple measurement frequencies.

Keywords: Bioimpedance; Monitoring; Needle; Nerve; Nerve stimulation; Regional anaesthesia.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study setup: The tip of a stimulation needle was placed under ultrasound guidance within the sciatic nerve and other tissue types (a and b). An impedance measurement system (Solartron 1260 and SI 1294) was connected for 3-electrode impedance measurements (c). Impedance as function of frequency was obtained by sweeping the excitation frequency in 25 logarithmically distributed steps from 1.26 to 398 kHz
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Measurements of the impedance Modulus in a frequency range from 1.26 to 398 kHz when the needle tip was positioned in intraneural tissue (a), paraneural tissue (b), muscle (c) and subcutaneous fat (d). Each color represents repeated measurements from one test animal. The y axis gives the Modulus in ohms; the x axis gives the measurement frequencies in Hertz on a logarithmic scale
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Measurements of the impedance Phase angel in a frequency range from 1.26 to 398 kHz when the needle tip was positioned in intraneural tissue (a), paraneural tissue (b), muscle (c) and subcutaneous fat (d). Each color represents repeated measurements from one test animal. The y axis gives the Phase angle in degrees; the x axis gives the measurement frequencies in Hertz on a logarithmic scale
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Parameters used to discriminate intraneural needle positions from positions in other tissue types. Statistical analysis (PCA) showed best tissue discrimination at 126 kHz for the Modulus (a), at 40 kHz for the Phase angle (b), at a Delta phase angle between 126 and 158 kHz (c). Tissue discrimination was further improved by combining these measurements in a Compound variableC (d). The box plot denotes median, quartile, range and outliers. The quoted p values relates to the statistical differences of means versus intraneural needle positions. Not significant differences are denoted n.s
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) for the four parameters used to discriminate intraneural needle placement from other tissue types. True positive values (sensitivity) and False positive values (100 \%-specificity) are plotted while increasing cutoff in steps of 5 % from the lowest to the highest values. The area under the curve (AUC) is consecutively increasing for the Modulus (78 %), Phase angle (86 %), Delta (94 %) and the Compound variable C (97 %). Best specificity and sensitivity can be obtained by using the compound parameter C. The predefined cutoff value C equals 1 that was used for our prototype (See video 1, electronic supplementary material) is labeled with (1)

References

    1. Borgeat A, Blumenthal S. Nerve injury and regional anaesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2004;17(5):417–421. doi: 10.1097/00001503-200410000-00011.
    1. Borgeat A, Ekatodramis G, Kalberer F, Benz C. Acute and nonacute complications associated with interscalene block and shoulder surgery: a prospective study. Anesthesiology. 2001;95(4):875–880. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200110000-00015.
    1. Hogan QH. Pathophysiology of peripheral nerve injury during regional anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008;33(5):435–441. doi: 10.1097/00115550-200809000-00006.
    1. Klaastad O, Sauter AR, Dodgson MS. Brachial plexus block with or without ultrasound guidance. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2009;22(5):655–660. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e32832eb7d3.
    1. Voelckel WG, Klima G, Krismer AC, Haslinger C, Stadlbauer KH, Wenzel V, von Goedecke A. Signs of inflammation after sciatic nerve block in pigs. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(6):1844–1846. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000184255.43746.89.
    1. Chan VW, Brull R, McCartney CJ, Xu D, Abbas S, Shannon P. An ultrasonographic and histological study of intraneural injection and electrical stimulation in pigs. Anesth Analg. 2007;104(5):1281–1284. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000250915.45247.24.
    1. Bigeleisen PE, Moayeri N, Groen GJ. Extraneural versus intraneural stimulation thresholds during ultrasound-guided supraclavicular block. Anesthesiology. 2009;110(6):1235–1243. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181a59891.
    1. Hadzic A, Dilberovic F, Shah S, Kulenovic A, Kapur E, Zaciragic A, Cosovic E, Vuckovic I, Divanovic KA, Mornjakovic Z, Thys DM, Santos AC. Combination of intraneural injection and high injection pressure leads to fascicular injury and neurologic deficits in dogs. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2004;29(5):417–423. doi: 10.1097/00115550-200409000-00005.
    1. Kapur E, Vuckovic I, Dilberovic F, Zaciragic A, Cosovic E, Divanovic KA, Mornjakovic Z, Babic M, Borgeat A, Thys DM, Hadzic A. Neurologic and histologic outcome after intraneural injections of lidocaine in canine sciatic nerves. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007;51(1):101–107. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01169.x.
    1. Gadsden J, McCally C, Hadzic A. Monitoring during peripheral nerve blockade. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2010;23(5):656–661. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e32833d4f99.
    1. Wiesmann T, Borntrager A, Vassiliou T, Hadzic A, Wulf H, Muller HH, Steinfeldt T. Minimal current intensity to elicit an evoked motor response cannot discern between needle-nerve contact and intraneural needle insertion. Anesth Analg. 2014;118(3):681–686. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182a94454.
    1. Grimnes S, Martinsen OG. Bioimpedance and bioelectricity basics. 2. San Diego: Academic Press; 2008.
    1. Bardou P, Merle JC, Woillard JB, Nathan-Denizot N, Beaulieu P. Electrical impedance to detect accidental nerve puncture during ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blocks. Can J Anaesth. 2012;60(3):253–258. doi: 10.1007/s12630-012-9845-y.
    1. Tsui BC, Pillay JJ, Chu KT, Dillane D. Electrical impedance to distinguish intraneural from extraneural needle placement in porcine nerves during direct exposure and ultrasound guidance. Anesthesiology. 2008;109(3):479–483. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318182c288.
    1. Kalvøy H, Frich L, Grimnes S, Martinsen ØG, Hol PK, Stubhaug A. Impedance-based tissue discrimination for needle guidance. Physiol Meas. 2009;30(2):129. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/30/2/002.
    1. Høyum P, Kalvøy H, Martinsen ØG, Grimnes S. A finite element model of needle electrode spatial sensitivity. Physiol Meas. 2010;31(10):1369–1379. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/31/10/006.
    1. R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2010. .
    1. Foster KR, Schwan HP. Dielectric properties of tissues and biological materials: a critical review. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 1989;17(1):25–104.
    1. Kalvøy H, Tronstad C, Nordbotten B, Grimnes S, Martinsen ØG. Electrical impedance of stainless steel needle electrodes. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38(7):2371–2382. doi: 10.1007/s10439-010-9989-2.
    1. Franco CD. Connective tissues associated with peripheral nerves. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012;37(4):363–365. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e31825a9485.
    1. Moayeri N, Bigeleisen PE, Groen GJ. Quantitative architecture of the brachial plexus and surrounding compartments, and their possible significance for plexus blocks. Anesthesiology. 2008;108(2):299–304. doi: 10.1097/01.anes.0000299433.25179.70.
    1. Sunderland S. The connective tissues of peripheral nerves. Brain. 1965;88(4):841–854. doi: 10.1093/brain/88.4.841.
    1. Morau D, Levy F, Bringuier S, Biboulet P, Choquet O, Kassim M, Bernard N, Capdevila X. Ultrasound-guided evaluation of the local anesthetic spread parameters required for a rapid surgical popliteal sciatic nerve block. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35(6):559–564. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181fa6b60.
    1. Gabriel C, Gabriel S, Corthout E. The dielectric properties of biological tissues: I. Literature survey. Phys Med Biol. 1996;41(11):2231–2249. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/41/11/001.
    1. Gatterer H, Schenk K, Laninschegg L, Schlemmer P, Lukaski H, Burtscher M. Bioimpedance identifies body fluid loss after exercise in the heat: a pilot study with body cooling. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e109729. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109729.
    1. Geddes LA, Da Costa CP, Wise G. The impedance of stainless-steel electrodes. Med Biol Eng. 1971;9(5):511–521. doi: 10.1007/BF02474708.
    1. Sauter AR, Dodgson MS, Kalvøy H, Grimnes S, Stubhaug A, Klaastad Ø. Current threshold for nerve stimulation depends on electrical impedance of the tissue: a study of ultrasound-guided electrical nerve stimulation of the median nerve. Anesth Analg. 2009;108(4):1338–1343. doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181957d84.
    1. Kuo FF. Network analysis and synthesis. New York: Wiley; 1966.
    1. Gabriel S, Lau R, Gabriel C. The dielectric properties of biological tissues: II. Measurements in the frequency range 10 Hz to 20 GHz. Phys Med Biol. 1996;41(11):2251. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/41/11/002.
    1. Martinsen ØG, Kalvøy H, Grimnes S, Nordbotten B, Hol PK, Fosse E, Myklebust H, Becker LB. Invasive electrical impedance tomography for blood vessel detection. Open Biomed Eng J. 2010;4:135–137. doi: 10.2174/1874120701004010135.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner