Supplements

The costoclavicular approach for infraclavicular perineural catheter placement is not superior to the paracoracoid approach for sensory blockade or analgesic effectiveness in ambulatory hand and wrist surgery.

In a randomized controlled trial of 139 adults undergoing ambulatory hand and wrist surgery, the costoclavicular (CC) approach resulted in successful sensory blockade at 48 hours in 42.6% of patients compared to 47.8% with the paracoracoid (PC) approach (adjusted risk difference -1.3%, 95% CI -17.5% to 15.0%). No clinically meaningful differences were observed in pain scores, opioid consumption, sleep quality, or patient satisfaction.

Last updated: Jul 20, 2026โ€ข1 RCTsโ€ข๐Ÿ“– Read as article โ†’

Evidence Score

Evidence Score44/100
Human RCTโ˜…โ˜…โ˜†โ˜†โ˜†
Meta-analysisโ˜†โ˜†โ˜†โ˜†โ˜†
Mechanismโ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…
Safetyโ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜…โ˜†
Confidencelow

Study Evidence

Study 1. Comparison of costoclavicular and paracoracoid approaches for infraclavicular perineural catheter placement in outpatient hand and wrist surgeries: a randomized controlled trial.

observational

Roy M, Carrier FM, Ferreira Guerra S, Garneau S, Harris P, Fournier N, Robin F ยท Regional anesthesia and pain medicine (2026)

Participants: N/A
Duration: 48 hours
Intervention: Ultrasound-guided continuous infraclavicular perineural catheter using the costoclavicular (CC) approach versus the paracoracoid (PC) approach, with standardized infusion of 0.15% bupivacaine at 5 mL/hour for 48 hours.
Outcome: Successful sensory blockade in all four terminal nerve territories at 48 hours; secondary outcomes included pain scores, opioid consumption, sleep quality, patient satisfaction, and complications.
Effect Size: Adjusted risk difference -1.3% (95% CI -17.5% to 15.0%)
Population: Adults undergoing ambulatory hand and wrist surgery (n=139, 69 CC, 70 PC).

Result:

Mechanism Graph

Costoclavicular approach targets tighter clustering of brachial plexus cords
โ†“
Tighter clustering may improve local anesthetic spread
โ†“
Standardized low-rate infusion of bupivacaine administered for 48 hours
โ†“
Result: No significant difference in sensory blockade or analgesic effectiveness between CC and PC approaches

Limitations

  • โš The study used a standardized low-rate infusion (5 mL/hour) which may not reflect optimal dosing for either approach
  • โš The primary outcome (successful sensory blockade at 48 hours) had a lower-than-expected success rate, potentially reducing statistical power

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the costoclavicular approach for infraclavicular catheters?โ–ผ

The costoclavicular (CC) approach is an ultrasound-guided technique for placing a continuous infraclavicular perineural catheter that targets the brachial plexus cords near the clavicle, aiming for tighter clustering of nerves to improve local anesthetic spread.

How was sleep quality measured in this study?โ–ผ

Sleep quality was assessed as a secondary outcome, but the abstract does not specify the exact measurement tool; it reports no clinically meaningful difference between the CC and PC groups.

What was the failure rate of sensory blockade in the study?โ–ผ

Successful sensory blockade at 48 hours occurred in 42.6% of the CC group and 47.8% of the PC group, meaning failure rates were 57.4% and 52.2%, respectively.

Does this study support using the costoclavicular approach over the paracoracoid approach?โ–ผ

No, the study found no evidence that the costoclavicular approach is superior to the paracoracoid approach for sensory blockade or analgesic effectiveness, suggesting technique selection can be based on operator preference.

Products

Affiliate links coming soon. We only recommend products that match the doses and forms used in the cited research.

References

  1. 1.Roy M, Carrier FM, Ferreira Guerra S, Garneau S, Harris P, Fournier N, Robin F. "Comparison of costoclavicular and paracoracoid approaches for infraclavicular perineural catheter placement in outpatient hand and wrist surgeries: a randomized controlled trial.." Regional anesthesia and pain medicine, 2026. PMID: 42457311 DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2026-107692
Disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and is not medical advice. Evidence scores reflect the quality and quantity of available research, not clinical recommendations. Always consult a healthcare professional before starting any supplement or intervention.