Failed dural puncture during needle-through-needle combined spinal-epidural anesthesia: a case series

Handheld ultrasound-assisted versus palpation-guided combined spinal-epidural for labor analgesia: a randomized controlled trial

Preprocedural ultrasound assistance can enhance the efficacy of neuraxial anesthesia in obstetrics. We investigated whether the use of handheld ultrasound can shorten the procedural time of labor combined spinal-epidural (CSE) analgesia compared with conventional landmark-guided methods. Eighty-four women requesting labor analgesia were randomly assigned to either handheld ultrasound-assisted or palpation-guided CSE analgesia. Primary outcome was procedure time of the CSE analgesia. Secondary outcomes included identification time, performance time, number of needle manipulations required for epidural/spinal success, first-attempt success rate, periprocedural pain scores, the incidence of accidental dural puncture, and patient satisfaction. Total procedure time did not significantly differ between the ultrasound and palpation groups (median [IQR], 191.5 [167-224] vs. 204.5 [163-358] s; P = 0.442). However, the performance time was significantly shorter in the ultrasound group (134.5 [115-177] vs. 183 [129-296] s; P = 0.011), although identification time was longer in the ultrasound group (53 [41-72] vs. 30.5 [21-45] s; P < 0.001). The epidural success rate at first insertion attempt was higher in the ultrasound group (85.7% vs. 59.5%, P = 0.014). Preprocedural handheld ultrasound assistance resulted in equivalent total procedure times but reduced performance times and higher first-attempt success rates. Therefore, clinicians may consider this technique for labor CSE analgesia.Trial registration: NCT04759547.

Comparison of Dural Puncture Epidural, Epidural and Combined Spinal-Epidural Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Catheter-based techniques such as combined spinal-epidural (CSE) anesthesia which are sometimes indicated for obstetric anesthesia have a complex mechanism of action. The application of the dural puncture epidural (DPE) anesthesia for cesarean section (CS) has not been well investigated. The present study compared the relatively novel DPE technique with epidural (EA) and CSE anesthesia.

Patients and Methods

We randomly assigned 150 parturients who underwent elective CS to receive DPE, EA or CSE anesthesia. The primary outcome was the onset of sensory anesthesia to the T5 dermatome assessed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Secondary outcomes included median time to sensory block, quality of block, patient and surgeon satisfaction, APGAR scores and other side effects.

Results

For DPE anesthesia versus EA anesthesia, the onset of anesthesia was faster (hazard ratio 2.47 [95% CI 1.56 to 3.90], adjusted P < 0.001) and the median time to surgical level was shorter (16 [IQR 14-18] min versus 19 [15.5-21] min, adjusted P < 0.001); the incidence of intraoperative pain was lower (7/48 versus 17/47, adjusted P = 0.046) and the median patient satisfaction score was higher (9 [IQR 9-10] versus 8 [8-9.5], adjusted P = 0.004). In the CSE group, the onset of anesthesia was faster than in the other two but the incidence of hypotension was higher (P < 0.001) and the phenylephrine requirement was greater (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

DPE anesthesia had a faster onset and better quality of block than EA anesthesia and provided less influence to maternal hemodynamic parameters than CSE anesthesia for CS. These results suggest that the dural puncture plays a significant role in enhancing the effectiveness of epidural top-ups during CSE anesthesia and indicates enlightenment that contributes to the satisfaction of anesthetic effect in DPE technique labor analgesia transferred to CS.

A clinical comparison between single-space technique and double-space technique for combined spinal and epidural anesthesia

Background:

Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia (CSEA) is commonly performed by double space technique (DST) and single space segment technique (SST) or needle-through-needle technique (NNT).

Aims and Objectives:

We designed a double-blind randomized controlled study to compare the effect of the double-space technique with that of the single-space technique on time required by the procedure, the number of attempts, and a level of sensory, side effects and cost-effectiveness.

Materials and Methods:

Patients undergoing elective lower abdominal and lower limb surgeries under regional anesthesia were randomized to receive CSEA with either the double-space technique (double group, n = 30) or the single-space technique (single group, n = 30). In the single group, the procedure was performed at the L3-4 interspace using the needle-through-needle technique. In the double group, an epidural catheter was inserted at the L1–2 interspace, and dural puncture was performed at the L3–4 interspace.

Results:

The single space (needle-through-needle) technique for CSE takes less time, less number of spinal punctures. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of side effects. Sensory level at T10 on 5 min in group I was 90% and group II was 100% whereas at T8 it was 10% in group I; sensory level at T10, T8 and T6 on 10 min. in group I were 53.3%, 43.3% and 3.3% respectively whereas in group II were 80%, 16.7% and 3.3% respectively; sensory level at T10, T8, T6 and T4 on 15 min. in group I were 6.7%, 43.3%, 50% and 0% respectively whereas in group II were 23.3%, 50%, 23.3% and 3.3% respectively; and sensory level at T4, T6 and T8 on 20 min. in group I were 0%, 73.3% and 26.7% respectively whereas in group II were 16.7%, 33.3% and 50% respectively.

Conclusions:

Single-space (needle-through-needle) CSEA takes less time, less number of spinal punctures and results in improved patient satisfaction. There were no differences in intraoperative variables between the DST and SST for CSEA.

Ultrasound increases the success rate of spinal needle placement through the epidural needle during combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia: A randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia (CSEA) using a needle-through-needle technique is currently widely used. However, successful epidural needle placement does not mean a successful spinal needle placement during CSEA. Whether ultrasound assistance could increase the first-pass success rate of spinal needle placement for CSEA remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate if ultrasound assistance could increase the first-pass success rate of spinal needle placement through the epidural needle during CSEA performed by experienced anaesthesiologists in patients undergoing caesarean section.

DESIGN

A prospective, randomised, double-blind study.

SETTING

Single centre, Department of Anaesthesiology, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, China, from June 2019 to September 2019.

PATIENTS

A total of 185 patients (aged 24 years to 52 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (ASA) II-III, 38 to 40 weeks gestation) scheduled to undergo elective caesarean section under CSEA were enrolled.

INTERVENTION

The patients were randomised to either an ultrasound group (patients received a preprocedural ultrasound scan, and the puncture site was identified by ultrasound imaging) and a palpation group (patients received a sham procedural ultrasound scan, and the puncture site was identified by conventional palpation).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the first-pass success rate for spinal needle placement through the epidural needle. Secondary outcome measures were total duration of CSEA, time required for successful epidural needle and spinal needle placement, number of epidural needle redirections and complications.

RESULTS

Preprocedural ultrasound imaging significantly increased the first-pass success rate of spinal needle placement through the epidural needle compared with conventional palpation (93.8 vs. 68.8%, P < 0.001). Preprocedural ultrasound imaging also decreased the total duration of CSEA (186.9 ± 37.1 vs. 213 ± 60.4 s, P = 0.0015) and the time required for successful spinal needle placement (78.3 ± 22.9 vs. 100.1 ± 53.7 s, P < 0.01) compared with conventional palpation. Fewer patients in the ultrasound group needed epidural needle redirections during the spinal needle placement procedure than in the palpation group (four patients vs. 20 patients, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

For experienced anaesthesiologists, preprocedural ultrasound imaging significantly increased the first-pass success rate of spinal needle placement through the epidural needle for obstetric patients undergoing caesarean section under CSEA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR1900024132.