Comparison of Ultrasound Assisted Versus Palpation Method for Diagnostic Lumbar Puncture in Neonates: A Randomized Control Trial

Q4 Medicine
Pradeep Chandu, Ashish Jain, Nidhi Jain, Swati Gupta, Natasha Gupta
{"title":"Comparison of Ultrasound Assisted Versus Palpation Method for Diagnostic Lumbar Puncture in Neonates: A Randomized Control Trial","authors":"Pradeep Chandu, Ashish Jain, Nidhi Jain, Swati Gupta, Natasha Gupta","doi":"10.1177/09732179231210734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Our purpose was to determine the beneficial effect of ultrasound (US) assisted lumbar puncture (UALP) to increase lumbar puncture (LP) success compared with the clinical conventional palpation (CCP) method. Methods: This parallel randomized controlled single-center trial was conducted in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in a tertiary care Hospital. Neonates >28 weeks requiring LP were enrolled and stratified into two groups ≥34 and <34 weeks gestational age. Prior to study initiation, training under the supervision of a qualified radiologist was undertaken. The primary outcome was successful LP (defined as no dry tap and cerebrospinal fluid RBC <1,000/mm 3 ). Secondary outcomes were time taken for the procedure, US estimation of the point of formation of conus. Results: A total of 55 cases were randomized after exclusion out of which 29 cases were assigned to UALP and 26 cases to CCP. There was no difference in the primary outcome of LP success between the UALP group and the CCP group [89.7% vs. 84.6%; difference: 5.1% (95% confidence interval: −12.7% to 22.7%)], p = .57. There was a statistically significant difference in time taken for procedure 81.46 ± 65.21 seconds (mean ± SD) in CCP versus 327.93 ± 128.07 seconds in UALP ( p < .001). Results were similar in both groups (<34 and ≥34 weeks gestational age) if analyzed separately. Conclusion: UALP did not improve the successful LP when compared with the CCP method. Time taken for procedure is higher in the UALP group.","PeriodicalId":16516,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neonatology","volume":"7 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neonatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09732179231210734","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Our purpose was to determine the beneficial effect of ultrasound (US) assisted lumbar puncture (UALP) to increase lumbar puncture (LP) success compared with the clinical conventional palpation (CCP) method. Methods: This parallel randomized controlled single-center trial was conducted in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in a tertiary care Hospital. Neonates >28 weeks requiring LP were enrolled and stratified into two groups ≥34 and <34 weeks gestational age. Prior to study initiation, training under the supervision of a qualified radiologist was undertaken. The primary outcome was successful LP (defined as no dry tap and cerebrospinal fluid RBC <1,000/mm 3 ). Secondary outcomes were time taken for the procedure, US estimation of the point of formation of conus. Results: A total of 55 cases were randomized after exclusion out of which 29 cases were assigned to UALP and 26 cases to CCP. There was no difference in the primary outcome of LP success between the UALP group and the CCP group [89.7% vs. 84.6%; difference: 5.1% (95% confidence interval: −12.7% to 22.7%)], p = .57. There was a statistically significant difference in time taken for procedure 81.46 ± 65.21 seconds (mean ± SD) in CCP versus 327.93 ± 128.07 seconds in UALP ( p < .001). Results were similar in both groups (<34 and ≥34 weeks gestational age) if analyzed separately. Conclusion: UALP did not improve the successful LP when compared with the CCP method. Time taken for procedure is higher in the UALP group.
新生儿腰椎穿刺诊断中超声辅助法与触诊法的比较:随机对照试验
背景:我们的目的是确定与临床传统触诊法(CCP)相比,超声(US)辅助腰椎穿刺(UALP)对提高腰椎穿刺(LP)成功率的有利影响。方法:这项平行随机对照单中心试验在一家三级医院的新生儿重症监护室进行。将胎龄大于 28 周、需要做 LP 的新生儿分为两组:胎龄≥ 34 周和小于 34 周。研究开始前,在一名合格放射科医生的指导下进行了培训。主要结果是LP成功(定义为无干拍和脑脊液RBC<1,000/mm 3)。次要结果是手术耗时、用 US 评估锥体形成点。结果:经排除后,共有 55 个病例被随机分配,其中 29 个病例被分配到 UALP,26 个病例被分配到 CCP。UALP 组和 CCP 组在 LP 成功率这一主要结果上没有差异[89.7% 对 84.6%;差异:5.1%(95% 置信区间)]:5.1%(95% 置信区间:-12.7% 至 22.7%)],P = 0.57。CCP 与 UALP 的手术时间差异有统计学意义(CCP 为 81.46 ± 65.21 秒,平均 ± SD),而 UALP 为 327.93 ± 128.07 秒(P < .001)。如果分别进行分析,两组(胎龄<34周和≥34周)的结果相似。结论:与 CCP 方法相比,UALP 并未提高 LP 的成功率。UALP 组的手术时间更长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Neonatology
Journal of Neonatology Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信