You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Case Reports: Novel treatment (new drug/interventions; established drug/procedure in new situation)
Effectiveness of a PENG catheter and the implications and a complication of tunnelling
  1. Preya Rengaraj and
  2. Subramanian Vishnampettai Vaidyanathan
  1. Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pondicherry, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Preya Rengaraj; preya.raj92{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a recently developed technique for analgesia for hip surgeries. We chose to use a PENG catheter for effective analgesia perioperatively. In this case report, we performed PENG catheter for a patient posted for hip hemiarthroplasty. During the process of tunnelling after securing the catheter, we accidentally sheared the catheter and had to redo the procedure. The patient was comfortable during their stay with minimal pain. This case report emphasises the importance of securing a catheter in providing prolonged analgesia and also the importance of dealing with complications due to the procedure itself.

  • Anaesthesia
  • Pain

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2022-252901

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors PR: drafting the manuscript. SVV: editing and drafting of the manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.