Analyze Diet
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2024; 14(15); 2161; doi: 10.3390/ani14152161

An Explorative Anatomical Study on Inter-Individual Variation of the Tibial Nerve and Landmarks for Perineural Anesthesia in Horses.

Abstract: Perineural anesthesia of the tibial nerve can be performed ultrasound-guided or blindly, with the latter still being commonly used in equine practice due to practical constraints, despite its lower accuracy and hence, common failure to achieve desensitization. This may be associated with anatomical variations or inadequate landmarks for injection. To examine the course of the tibial nerve, document potential anatomical variations, and determine optimal landmarks for perineural injection, dissection was conducted along the medial aspect of the tibia in 10 paired cadaver hindlimbs. No anatomical variations of the tibial nerve were observed. Mean tibial nerve thickness was 6 ± 1 mm. The junction with the plantar nerves was located at a maximum of 85 mm and the junction with the medial cutaneous branch was at a maximum of 150 mm proximal to the proximal aspect of the calcaneal tubercle. The mean distance of the tibial nerve to the cranial border of the superficial digital flexor was 11 ± 6 mm. In conclusion, problems with perineural anesthesia of the tibial nerve cannot simply be attributed to anatomical variations. The thickness of the nerve and the amount of perineural tissue may present specific challenges for achieving adequate desensitization. Our results support the generally recommended site for tibial nerve perineural injection at 100 mm proximal to the calcaneal tubercle and 11 mm cranial to the superficial digital flexor.
Publication Date: 2024-07-24 PubMed ID: 39123687PubMed Central: PMC11311088DOI: 10.3390/ani14152161Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research is about the investigation of the tibial nerve anatomy in horses and determining optimal points for perineural anesthesia injection. No significant variations were observed in the anatomy, but the nerve thickness and amount of perineural tissue could make achieving effective anesthesia difficult.

Objective of the Research

In this study, the researchers examined to understand the anatomy of the tibial nerve in horses. They attempted to track the course of the tibial nerve, record any potential anatomical variations, and identify the best landmarks for injecting perineural anesthesia.

  • The procedure of perineural anesthesia in horses can be guided by ultrasound or done blindly. However, the blind method is more commonly used in veterinary practice due to practical constraints.
  • The lower accuracy of the blind injection approach could lead to failure to achieve desensitization, and this can be tied to anatomical variations or possibly insufficient landmarks for injection.

Methodology

The research team dissected the medial aspect of the tibia of 10 paired cadaver hindlimbs to investigate the nerve’s course.

  • No anatomical variants of the tibial nerve were encountered during the dissections.
  • The average thickness of the tibial nerve was measured to be 6 ± 1 mm.
  • The junctions of the tibial nerve with the plantar nerves and the medial cutaneous branch were located at maximum distances of 85 mm and 150 mm, respectively, proximal to the proximal edge of the calcaneal tubercle.
  • The average distance of the tibial nerve to the cranial border of the superficial digital flexor was calculated to be 11 ± 6 mm.

Conclusions

The study concluded that problems with perineural anesthesia of the tibial nerve may not necessarily be due to anatomical variations.

  • The thickness of the nerve and the amount of perineural tissue can pose specific challenges in attaining effective desensitization.
  • The results obtained align with the generally recommended site for tibial nerve perineural injection being 100 mm proximal to the calcaneal tubercle and 11 mm cranial to the superficial digital flexor.

Cite This Article

APA
De Schryver M, Oosterlinck M. (2024). An Explorative Anatomical Study on Inter-Individual Variation of the Tibial Nerve and Landmarks for Perineural Anesthesia in Horses. Animals (Basel), 14(15), 2161. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14152161

Publication

ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 14
Issue: 15
PII: 2161

Researcher Affiliations

De Schryver, Margot
  • Department of Large Animal Surgery, Anaesthesia and Orthopaedics, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.
Oosterlinck, Maarten
  • Department of Large Animal Surgery, Anaesthesia and Orthopaedics, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 15 references
  1. Moyer W, Schumacher J, Schumacher J. Regional Anesthesia: Hindlimb Nerve Blocks. In: Solutions A.V., editor. Equine Joint Injection and Regional Anesthesia. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; Hoboken, NJ, USA: 2011. pp. 116–117.
  2. Schmotzer W.B., Timm K.I.. Local anesthetic techniques for diagnosis of lameness. Vet. Clin. N. Am. Equine Pract. 1990;6:705–728.
    doi: 10.1016/S0749-0739(17)30539-4pubmed: 2282556google scholar: lookup
  3. Bassage L.H. II, Ross M.W.. Diagnostic analgesia. In: Ross M.W., Dyson S.J., editors. Diagnosis and Management of Lameness in the Horse. Elsevier Saunders; St. Louis, MO, USA: 2011. p. 127.
  4. Baxter G.M., Stashak T.S.. Perineural and Intrasynovial Anesthesia. In: Baxter G.M., editor. Adams and Stashak’s Lameness in Horses. Wiley-Blackwell; Oxford, UK: 2011. pp. 182–183.
  5. Dyson S. Nerve blocks and lameness diagnosis in the horse. Practice 1984;6:102–107.
    doi: 10.1136/inpract.6.4.102pubmed: 6469381google scholar: lookup
  6. Wheat J.D., Jones K. Selected techniques of regional anesthesia. Vet. Clin. N. Am. Large Anim. Pract. 1981;3:223–246.
    doi: 10.1016/S0196-9846(17)30154-4pubmed: 7269166google scholar: lookup
  7. Denoix J.M., Beaumont A., Bertoni L. Ultrasonographic guided block of the tibial nerve. Equine Vet. Educ. 2020;32:372–377.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13020google scholar: lookup
  8. van der Laan M., Raes E., Oosterlinck M. Cadaveric comparison of the accuracy of ultrasound-guided versus ‘blind’ perineural injection of the tibial nerve in horses. Vet. J. 2021;269:105603.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2020.105603pubmed: 33593495google scholar: lookup
  9. Bellitto N.A., Voute L., Reardon R., Withers J.M.. Ultrasound-guided perineural injection of the tibial nerve in the horse versus a ‘blind’ technique. Equine Vet. Educ. 2024;36:64–73.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13855google scholar: lookup
  10. Budras K.D., Sack W.O., Röck S. Anatomy of the Horse. 5th ed. Schlütersche Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co.; Hannover, Germany: 2011. Pelvic Limb.
  11. Raes E.V., Bergman E.H., van der Veen H., Vanderperren K., Van der Vekens E., Saunders J.H.. Comparison of cross-sectional anatomy and computed tomography of the tarsus in horses. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2011;72:1209–1221.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.72.9.1209pubmed: 21879979google scholar: lookup
  12. Tomlinson J.E., Redding W.R., Berry C., Smallwood J.E.. Computed tomographic anatomy of the equine tarsus. Vet. Radiol. Ultrasound. 2003;44:174–178.
  13. Post E.M., Singer E.R., Clegg P.D.. An anatomic study of the calcaneal bursae in the horse. Vet. Surg. 2007;36:3–9.
  14. Alexander K., Dobson H. Ultrasonography of peripheral nerves in the normal adult horse. Vet. Radiol. Ultrasound. 2003;44:456–464.
  15. Nagy A., Bodo G., Dyson S.J., Szabo F., Barr A.R.. Diffusion of contrast medium after perineural injection of the palmar nerves: An in vivo and in vitro study. Equine Vet. J. 2009;41:379–383.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409X372502pubmed: 19562900google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.