Risk Factors for Unintended Dural Puncture in Obstetric Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Intrathecal catheter placement after inadvertent dural puncture in the obstetric population: management for labour and operative delivery. Guidelines from the Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association

BACKGROUND

Anaesthetists of all grades who work on a labour ward are likely to be involved in the insertion or management of an intrathecal catheter after inadvertent dural puncture at some point in their careers. Although the use of intrathecal catheters after inadvertent dural puncture in labour has increased in popularity over recent decades, robust evidence on best practice has been lacking.

METHODS

The Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association set up an expert working party to review the literature. A modified Delphi approach was used to produce statements and recommendations on insertion and management of intrathecal catheters for labour and operative delivery following inadvertent dural puncture during attempted labour epidural insertion. Statements and recommendations were graded according to the US Preventive Services Task Force grading methodology.

RESULTS

A total of 296 articles were identified in the initial literature search. Further screening identified 111 full text papers of relevance. A structured narrative review was produced which covered insertion of an intrathecal catheter; initial dosing; maintenance of labour analgesia; topping-up for operative delivery; safety features; complications; and recommended follow-up. The working party agreed on 17 statements and 26 recommendations. These were generally assigned a low or moderate level of certainty. The safety of mother and baby were a key priority in producing these guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

With careful management, intrathecal catheters can provide excellent labour analgesia and may also be topped-up to provide anaesthesia for caesarean or operative vaginal delivery. The use of intrathecal catheters, however, also carries the risk of significant drug errors which may result in high- or total-spinal anaesthesia, or even cardiorespiratory arrest. It is vital that all labour wards have clear guidelines on the use of these catheters, and that staff are educated as to their potential complications.

Chronic consequences of accidental dural puncture and postdural puncture headache in obstetric anaesthesia - sieving through the evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Accidental dural puncture (ADP) and postdural puncture headache (PDPH) are relatively common complications of neuraxial anaesthesia and analgesia in obstetrics. Both may result in acute and chronic morbidity. This review intends to discuss the chronic implications of ADP and PDPH and raise awareness of severe and potentially life-threatening conditions associated with them.

RECENT FINDINGS

ADP may be associated with a high rate of PDPH, prolonged hospitalization and increased readmissions. Studies have shown that PDPH may lead to chronic complications such as post-partum depression (PPD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), chronic headache, backache and reduced breastfeeding rates. There are many case reports indicating that major, severe, life-threatening neurologic complications may follow PDPH in obstetric patients including subdural haematoma and cerebral venous thrombosis.

SUMMARY

Many clinicians still believe that ADP and PDPH are benign and self-limiting conditions whereas there may be serious and devastating consequences of both. It is imperative that all women with ADP and PDPH are appropriately diagnosed and treated.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on postdural puncture headache: a consensus report from a multisociety international working group

INTRODUCTION

Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) can follow unintentional dural puncture during epidural techniques or intentional dural puncture during neuraxial procedures such as a lumbar puncture or spinal anesthesia. Evidence-based guidance on the prevention, diagnosis or management of this condition is, however, currently lacking. This multisociety guidance aims to fill this void and provide practitioners with comprehensive information and patient-centric recommendations to prevent, diagnose and manage patients with PDPH.

METHODS

Based on input from committee members and stakeholders, the committee cochairs developed 10 review questions deemed important for the prevention, diagnosis and management of PDPH. A literature search for each question was performed in MEDLINE (Ovid) on 2 March 2022. The results from each search were imported into separate Covidence projects for deduplication and screening, followed by data extraction. Additional relevant clinical trials, systematic reviews and research studies published through March 2022 were also considered for the development of guidelines and shared with contributors. Each group submitted a structured narrative review along with recommendations graded according to the US Preventative Services Task Force grading of evidence. The interim draft was shared electronically, with each collaborator requested to vote anonymously on each recommendation using two rounds of a modified Delphi approach.

RESULTS

Based on contemporary evidence and consensus, the multidisciplinary panel generated 50 recommendations to provide guidance regarding risk factors, prevention, diagnosis and management of PDPH, along with their strength and certainty of evidence. After two rounds of voting, we achieved a high level of consensus for all statements and recommendations. Several recommendations had moderate-to-low certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

These clinical practice guidelines for PDPH provide a framework to improve identification, evaluation and delivery of evidence-based care by physicians performing neuraxial procedures to improve the quality of care and align with patients' interests. Uncertainty remains regarding best practice for the majority of management approaches for PDPH due to the paucity of evidence. Additionally, opportunities for future research are identified.

Risk factors for recurrence of post-dural puncture headache following an epidural blood patch: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) occurs in 0.38-6.3% of neuraxial procedures in obstetrics. Epidural blood patch (EBP) is the standard treatment but fails to provide full symptom relief in 4-29% of cases. Knowledge of the risk factors for EBP failure is limited and controversial. This study aimed to identify these risk factors.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using electronic records of 47920 patients who underwent a neuraxial procedure between 2001 and 2018 in a large maternity hospital in Switzerland. The absence of full symptom relief and the need for further treatment was defined as an EBP failure. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to compare patients with a successful or failed EBP.

RESULTS

We identified 212 patients requiring an EBP. Of these, 55 (25.9%) had a failed EBP. Signs and symptoms of PDPH did not differ between groups. While needle size and multiple pregnancies were risk factors in the univariate analysis, mostly those related to the performance of the EBP remained significant following adjustment. The risk of failure increased when the epidural space was deeper than 5.5 cm (OR 3.08, 95% CI 1.26 to 7.49) and decreased when the time interval between the initial dural puncture and the EBP was >48 h (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.83).

CONCLUSION

Persistence of PDPH following a first EBP is not unusual. Close attention should be given to patients having their EBP performed <48 h following injury and having an epidural space located >5.5 cm depth, as these factors are associated with a failed EBP.

The effect of placement and management of intrathecal catheters following accidental dural puncture on the incidence of postdural puncture headache and severity: a retrospective real-world study

Accidental dural puncture during an attempt to establish labour epidural analgesia can result in postdural puncture headache and long-term debilitating conditions. Epidural blood patch, the gold standard treatment for this headache, is invasive and not always successful. Inserting an intrathecal catheter after accidental dural puncture may prevent postdural puncture headache. We evaluated the effect of intrathecal catheter insertion on the incidence of postdural puncture headache and the need for epidural blood patch and whether duration of intrathecal catheterisation or injection of intrathecal saline affected outcome. Our retrospective study was conducted at two tertiary, university-affiliated medical centres between 2017 and 2022 and included 92,651 epidurals and 550 cases of accidental dural puncture (0.59%); 219 parturients (39.8%) received an intrathecal catheter and 331 (60.2%) a resited epidural. Use of an intrathecal catheter versus resiting the epidural did not decrease the odds of postdural puncture headache, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) (95%CI) 0.91 (0.81-1.01), but was associated with a lower need for epidural blood patch (aOR (95%CI) 0.82 (0.73-0.91), p < 0.001). We found no benefit in leaving in the intrathecal catheter for 24 h postpartum (postdural puncture headache, aOR (95%CI) 1.01 (1.00-1.02), p = 0.015; epidural blood patch, aOR (95%CI) 1.00 (0.99-1.01), p = 0.40). We found an added benefit of injecting intrathecal saline as it decreased the incidence of postdural puncture headache (aOR (95%CI) 0.85 (0.73-0.99), p = 0.04) and the need for epidural blood patch (aOR (95%CI) 0.75 (0.64-0.87), p < 0.001). Our study confirms the benefits of intrathecal catheterisation and provides guidance on how to best manage an intrathecal catheter.

[Postdural puncture headache in obstetrics : Pathogenesis, diagnostics and treatment]

Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the most important complications of peripartum neuraxial analgesia. Loss of cerebrospinal fluid volume and pressure as well as compensatory intracranial vasodilation are assumed to be responsible. Potentially severe long-term sequelae necessitate the correct diagnosis of PDPH, exclusion of relevant differential diagnoses (with atypical symptoms and when indicated via imaging techniques) and rapid initiation of effective treatment. Nonopioid analgesics, caffeine and occasionally theophylline, gabapentin and hydrocortisone are the cornerstones of pharmacological treatment, while the timely placement of an autologous epidural blood patch (EBP) represents the gold standard procedure when symptoms persist despite the use of analgesics. Procedures using neural treatment are promising alternatives, especially when an EBP is not desired by the patient or is contraindicated. Interdisciplinary and interprofessional consensus standard procedures can contribute to optimization of the clinical management of this relevant complication.

Postdural Puncture Headache-Risks and Current Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This manuscript aims to review the risks and the current treatments for postdural puncture headache (PDPH).

RECENT FINDINGS

PDPH is a relatively frequent complication after neuraxial blocks. It is typically orthostatic in nature, presenting as a positional and dull aching or throbbing headache, with added dysregulation of auditory and/or visual signals. Certain characteristics, such as female sex and young age, may predispose patients to the development of PDPH, as may factors such as previous PDPH, bearing down during the second stage of labor, and the neuraxial technique itself. Long-term complications including chronic headache for years following dural puncture have brought into question of the historical classification of PDPH as a self-limiting headache. So far, the underlying mechanism governing PDPH remains under investigation, while a wide variety of prophylactic and therapeutic measures have been explored with various degree of success. In case of mild PDPH, conservative management involving bed rest and pharmacological management should be used as first-line treatment. Nerve blocks are highly efficient alternatives for PDPH patients who do not respond well to conservative treatment. In case of moderate-to-severe PDPH, epidural blood patch remains the therapy of choice. An interdisciplinary approach to care for patients with PDPH is recommended to achieve optimal outcomes.

Did she have an epidural? The long-term consequences of postdural puncture headache and the role of unintended dural puncture

OBJECTIVE

This narrative literature review examines the long-term impact of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) in postpartum women following an unintended dural puncture (UDP) with a large bore needle commonly used for epidural catheter placement. It seeks to bridge the knowledge gap for the neurologist as to the mounting body of obstetric anesthesia literature on the development of chronic headache after PDPH with this unique needle.

BACKGROUND

Headache is the most common complication of dural puncture, and the risk is greatest in the parturient population. Preexisting risk factors for this population include youth and sex, and after UDP with a large bore needle, almost 70%-80% report a headache. Additionally, there appears to be a significant cohort who experience long-term, persistent headache after UDP.

METHODS

We performed a narrative review of literature using PubMed, searching terms that included long-term follow-up after UDP with a large bore needle in the postpartum population.

RESULTS

In women who had UDP with a large bore needle used for epidural catheter placement at delivery, the rate of chronic debilitating headache is around 30% in the months following delivery and may persist for up to a year or longer.

CONCLUSION

Based on the existing literature, we have mounting evidence that UDP with the large bore needle used to place an epidural catheter should be understood as a high-risk inciting event for the development of long-term headaches not simply a high risk of acute PDPH. Additionally, consideration should be given to stratifying the etiology of PDPH, based on needle type, and recognizing the entity of chronic PDPH, thus allowing for improvements in research and diagnosis.

What's New in Neuraxial Labor Analgesia

Purpose of Review

This article provides an update of recent practice trends in neuraxial labor analgesia. It reviews available evidence regarding management of labor pain in obstetric patients with COVID-19, serious adverse events in obstetric anesthesia to help inform risk/benefit decisions, and increasingly popular neuraxial labor analgesia techniques and adjuvants. State-of-the-art modes of epidural drug delivery are also discussed.

Recent Findings

There has recently been a focus on several considerations specific to obstetric anesthesia, such as anesthetic management of obstetric patients with COVID-19, platelet thresholds for the safe performance of neuraxial analgesia in obstetric patients with thrombocytopenia, and drug delivery modes for initiation and maintenance of neuraxial labor analgesia.

Summary

Neuraxial labor analgesia (via standard epidural, dural puncture epidural, and combined spinal epidural techniques) is the most effective therapy to alleviate the pain of childbirth. SARS-CoV-2 infection is not, in and of itself, a contraindication to neuraxial labor analgesia or cesarean delivery anesthesia. Early initiation of neuraxial labor analgesia in patients with COVID-19 is recommended if not otherwise contraindicated, as it may reduce the need for general anesthesia should emergency cesarean delivery become necessary. Consensus regarding platelet thresholds for safe initiation of neuraxial procedures has historically been lacking. Recent studies have concluded that the risk of spinal epidural hematoma formation after neuraxial procedures is likely low at or above an imprecise range of platelet count of 70–75,000 × 10⁶/L. Thrombocytopenia has been reported in obstetric patients with COVID-19, but severe thrombocytopenia precluding initiation of neuraxial anesthesia is extremely rare. High neuraxial blockade has emerged as one of the most common serious complications of neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia in obstetric patients. Growing awareness of factors that contribute to failed conversion of epidural labor analgesia to cesarean delivery anesthesia may help avoid the risks associated with performance of repeat neuraxial techniques and induction of general anesthesia after failed epidural blockade. Dural puncture techniques to alleviate the pain of childbirth continue to become more popular, as do adjuvant drugs to enhance or prolong neuraxial analgesia. Novel techniques for epidural drug delivery have become more widely disseminated.

Long-term psychological and physical outcomes of women after postdural puncture headache: A retrospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Postdural puncture headache after accidental dural puncture during labour may lead to chronic sequalae.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to measure the incidence of postpartum depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic headache, backache and breastfeeding rates after a postdural puncture headache.

DESIGN

A retrospective, case-matched cohort study.

SETTING

A review of documented cases of dural puncture and matched case controls occurring at Rabin Medical Center and Shamir Medical Center from 01 January 2012 to 30 September 2018.

PATIENTS

The study cohort consisted of women with a documented postdural puncture headache and the controls were women with uneventful labour epidurals in the same 24-h period. Women were interviewed by telephone.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES MEASURE

The primary outcome measure was the incidence of postpartum depression after a postdural puncture headache.

RESULTS

Women with postdural puncture headache (n = 132) and controls (n = 276) had similar demographic data. The incidence of postpartum depression was 67/128 (52.3%) versus 31/276 (11.2%) for controls, P < 0.0001, 95% confidence intervals of the difference 31.5 to 50.2. Posttraumatic stress disorder was more frequent among women with postdural puncture headache, 17/132 (12.8%) versus controls 1/276 (0.4%), P < 0.0001, 95% confidence intervals of the difference 7.6 to 19.5. Women with postdural puncture headache breastfed less, 74/126 (54.5%) versus controls 212/276 (76.8%), P < 0.0001, 95% confidence intervals of the difference 33.1 to 55.2. Current headache and backache were significantly more frequent among women with postdural puncture headache [current headache 42/129 (32.6%) versus controls 42/276 (15.2%) P < 0.00001, 95% confidence intervals 0.085 to 0.266; current backache 58/129 (43.9%) versus controls 58/275 (21%) P < 0.0001, 95% confidence intervals 14.1 to 33.5].

CONCLUSION

We report an increased incidence of postpartum depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic headache and backache and decreased breastfeeding following a postdural puncture headache. Our findings emphasise the need for postpartum follow-up for women with postdural puncture headache.

TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER

Clinical trial registry number: NCT03550586.

Intrathecal catheter use after accidental dural puncture in obstetric patients: literature review and clinical management recommendations

If an accidental dural puncture occurs, one option is to insert a catheter and use it as an intrathecal catheter. This avoids the need for a further injection and can rapidly provide labour analgesia and anaesthesia for caesarean section. However, there are no recommendations for managing intrathecal catheters and, therefore, significant variation in clinical practice exists. Mismanagement of the intrathecal catheter can lead to increased motor block, high spinal anaesthesia, drug error, hypotension and fetal bradycardia. Care must be taken with an intrathecal catheter to adhere to strict aseptic technique, meticulous labelling, cautious administration of medications and good communication with the patient and other staff. Every institution considering the use of intrathecal catheters should establish a protocol. For labour analgesia, we recommend the use of dilute local anaesthetic agents and opioids. For caesarean section anaesthesia, gradual titration to the level of the fourth thoracic dermatome, with full monitoring, in a facility equipped to manage complications, should be performed using local anaesthetics combined with lipophilic opioids and morphine or diamorphine. Although evidence of the presence and duration of intrathecal catheters on the development of post-dural puncture headache and need for epidural blood patch is limited, we suggest considering leaving the intrathecal catheter in for 24 hours to reduce the chance of developing a post-dural puncture headache while maintaining precautions to avoid drug error and cerebrospinal fluid leakage. Injection of sterile normal saline into the intrathecal catheter may reduce post-dural puncture headache. The level of evidence for these recommendations was low.

Incidences and risk factors for post--dural puncture headache after neuraxial anaesthesia: A national inpatient database study in Japan

The reported incidence of post--dural puncture headache (PDPH) after neuraxial anaesthesia varies widely, depending on patient and procedural risk factors. Most previous studies have had small sample sizes and focused on obstetric patients. This study aimed to investigate the incidence of PDPH and factors associated with PDPH in non-obstetric and obstetric patients after neuraxial anaesthesia. We identified patients who underwent surgery with neuraxial anaesthesia between July 2010 and December 2017 from a Japanese nationwide inpatient administrative claims and discharge database. Factors associated with PDPH (body mass index (BMI), depression, spinal abnormalities, academic hospital and location of epidural anaesthesia) were examined using multivariable logistic analyses. The incidence of PDPH in non-obstetric patients after spinal anaesthesia, epidural anaesthesia and combined spinal epidural anaesthesia was 0.16%, 0.13% and 0.23% and in obstetric patients was 1.16%, 0.99% and 1.05%, respectively. Higher BMI was associated with decreased incidence of PDPH in non-obstetric patients receiving spinal anaesthesia and obstetric patients receiving epidural anaesthesia. In female patients receiving spinal anaesthesia, a history of depression was associated with increased incidence of PDPH. Being in an academic hospital was associated with decreased incidence of PDPH in male patients receiving spinal anaesthesia and female patients receiving spinal or epidural anaesthesia, but increased incidence of PDPH in male patients receiving epidural anaesthesia. Lumbar epidural anaesthesia was associated with increased incidence of PDPH in male patients, but decreased incidence of PDPH in obstetric patients compared with thoracic epidural anaesthesia. The present study identified several potential new risk factors for PDPH, and revealed that the incidence of PDPH in non-obstetric patients after neuraxial anaesthesia was lower than in obstetric patients.

[Postdural puncture headache after neuraxial anesthesia: incidence and risk factors]

Hintergrund/Ziel der Arbeit

Der postpunktionelle Kopfschmerz (PKS) ist eine Komplikation nach rückenmarknahen Verfahren (RA) mit erheblichem Krankheitswert. Ziel der Untersuchung war es, die Inzidenz des PKS in 2 großen operativen Kollektiven zu untersuchen, mögliche Risikofaktoren zu identifizieren und den Einfluss auf die Krankenhausverweildauer zu untersuchen.

Material und Methoden

In einer retrospektiven Analyse des Zeitraums 2010–2012 wurden 341 unfallchirurgische (UCH) und 2113 geburtsmedizinische (GEB) Patient*innen nach Spinalanästhesie (SPA) analysiert. In der statistischen Auswertung (SPSS-23) kamen univariate Analysen mittels Mann-Whitney-U-, Chi²- und Student’s t‑Test sowie logistische Regressionsanalysen zur Anwendung.

Ergebnisse

Die Inzidenz des PKS betrug in der UCH-Gruppe 5,9 % und in der GEB-Gruppe 1,8 %. Patient*innen mit PKS in der UCH wiesen ein jüngeres Patientenalter (38 vs. 47 Jahre, p = 0,011), einen geringeren BMI (23,5 vs. 25,2, p = 0,037) sowie ein niedrigeres Köpergewicht (70,5 kg vs. 77 kg, p = 0,006) als Patient*innen ohne PKS auf. Dabei konnten das Alter mit einer „odds ratio“ (OR 97,5 % Konfidenzintervall [KI]) von 0,963 (97,5% KI 0,932–0,991, p = 0,015) und das Köpergewicht mit einer OR von 0,956 (97,5 % KI 0,920–0,989, p = 0,014) als unabhängige Risikofaktoren für die Entstehung eines PKS identifiziert werden. In der GEB wies die SPA eine höhere Inzidenz des PKS auf als die kombinierte Spinalepiduralanästhesie (CSE) (8,6 % vs. 1,2 %, p < 0,001). Dabei erwies sich das Verfahren mit einer OR von 0,049 (97,5 % KI 0,023–0,106, p < 0,001) als unabhängiger Risikofaktor für die Entstehung eines PKS. In beiden Gruppen war der PKS mit einem verlängerten Krankenhausaufenthalt assoziiert (UCH-Gruppe 4 vs. 2 Tage, p = 0,001; GEB-Gruppe 6 vs. 4 Tage, p < 0.0005).

Diskussion

Die Inzidenz des PKS nach SPA/CSE war in unserer Untersuchung in den beschriebenen Patientengruppen unterschiedlich, mit einem deutlich höheren Anteil in der UCH-Gruppe. Alter, Konstitution und Verfahren waren hinweisgebende Risikofaktoren eines PKS. In Anbetracht der funktionellen Einschränkungen (Mobilisation, Versorgung des Neugeborenen) und des verlängerten Krankenhausaufenthalts, sollten zukünftige Studien eine frühe Behandlung des PKS untersuchen.

Epidural needle insertion : A large registry analysis

BACKGROUND

Dural puncture, paraesthesia and vascular puncture are the most common complications of epidural catheter insertion. Their association with variation in midline needle insertion depth is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the risk of dural and vascular punctures and the unwanted events paraesthesia and multiple skin punctures related to midline needle insertion depth.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 14,503 epidural catheter insertions including lumbar (L1-L5; n = 5367), low thoracic (T7-T12, n = 8234) and upper thoracic (T1-T6, n = 902) insertions, were extracted from the German Network for Regional Anaesthesia registry between 2007 and 2015. The primary outcomes were compared with logistic regression and adjusted (adj) for confounders to determine the risk of complications/events. Results are presented as odds ratios (OR, [95% confidence interval]).

MAIN RESULTS

Midline insertion depth depended on body mass index, sex, and spinal level. After adjusting for confounders increased puncture depth (cm) remained an independent risk factor for vascular puncture (adjOR 1.27 [1.09-1.47], p = 0.002) and multiple skin punctures (adjOR 1.25 [1.21-1.29], p < 0.001). In contrast, dural punctures occurred at significantly shallower depths (adjOR 0.73 [0.60-0.89], p = 0.002). Paraesthesia was unrelated to insertion depth. Body mass index and sex had no influence on paraesthesia, dural and vascular punctures. Thoracic epidural insertion was associated with a lower risk of vascular puncture than at lumbar sites (adjOR 0.39 [0.18-0.84], p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Variation in midline insertion depth is an independent risk factor for epidural complications; however, variability precludes use of depth as a reliable guide to insertion in individual patients.