Efficacy of therapies for post dural puncture headache.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Current Opinion in Anesthesiology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-19 DOI:10.1097/ACO.0000000000001361
Jan N Thon, Markus A Weigand, Peter Kranke, Benedikt H Siegler
{"title":"Efficacy of therapies for post dural puncture headache.","authors":"Jan N Thon, Markus A Weigand, Peter Kranke, Benedikt H Siegler","doi":"10.1097/ACO.0000000000001361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Clinical management of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) remains an interdisciplinary challenge with significant impact on both morbidity and quality of life. This review aims to give an overview of the most recent literature on prophylactic and therapeutic measures and to discuss novel findings with regard to currently published consensus practice guideline recommendations.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Although current evidence does not support a recommendation of any specific prophylactic measure, new data is available on the use of intrathecal catheters to prevent PDPH and/or to avoid invasive procedures. In case of disabling or refractory symptoms despite conservative treatments, the epidural blood patch (EBP) remains the therapeutic gold standard and its use should not be delayed in the absence of contraindications. However, recent clinical studies and meta-analyses provide additional findings on the therapeutic use of local anesthetics as potential noninvasive alternatives for early symptom control.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>There is continuing research focusing on both prophylactic and therapeutic measures offering promising data on potential alternatives to invasive procedures, although there is currently no treatment option that comes close to the effectiveness of an EBP. A better understanding of PDPH pathophysiology is not only necessary to identify new therapeutic targets, but also to recognize patients who benefit most from current treatments, as this might enhance their therapeutic efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":50609,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0000000000001361","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Clinical management of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) remains an interdisciplinary challenge with significant impact on both morbidity and quality of life. This review aims to give an overview of the most recent literature on prophylactic and therapeutic measures and to discuss novel findings with regard to currently published consensus practice guideline recommendations.

Recent findings: Although current evidence does not support a recommendation of any specific prophylactic measure, new data is available on the use of intrathecal catheters to prevent PDPH and/or to avoid invasive procedures. In case of disabling or refractory symptoms despite conservative treatments, the epidural blood patch (EBP) remains the therapeutic gold standard and its use should not be delayed in the absence of contraindications. However, recent clinical studies and meta-analyses provide additional findings on the therapeutic use of local anesthetics as potential noninvasive alternatives for early symptom control.

Summary: There is continuing research focusing on both prophylactic and therapeutic measures offering promising data on potential alternatives to invasive procedures, although there is currently no treatment option that comes close to the effectiveness of an EBP. A better understanding of PDPH pathophysiology is not only necessary to identify new therapeutic targets, but also to recognize patients who benefit most from current treatments, as this might enhance their therapeutic efficacy.

硬脑膜穿刺后头痛的疗效。
审查目的:硬膜穿刺后头痛(PDPH)的临床治疗仍然是一项跨学科挑战,对发病率和生活质量都有重大影响。本综述旨在概述有关预防和治疗措施的最新文献,并讨论与目前发布的共识实践指南建议有关的新发现:尽管目前的证据并不支持推荐任何特定的预防措施,但关于使用鞘内导管预防 PDPH 和/或避免侵入性手术的新数据已经出现。在保守治疗无效或出现难治性症状的情况下,硬膜外血贴片(EBP)仍是治疗的金标准,在没有禁忌症的情况下不应延迟使用。然而,最近的临床研究和荟萃分析提供了更多关于局麻药作为早期症状控制的潜在非侵入性替代治疗方法的研究结果。摘要:尽管目前还没有接近 EBP 效果的治疗方案,但预防性和治疗性措施方面的研究仍在继续,并提供了有希望替代侵入性手术的数据。更好地了解 PDPH 的病理生理学不仅对确定新的治疗目标很有必要,而且对识别从现有治疗方法中获益最多的患者也很有必要,因为这可能会提高这些治疗方法的疗效。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
207
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​Published bimonthly and offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field, each issue of Current Opinion in Anesthesiology features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With fifteen disciplines published across the year – including cardiovascular anesthesiology, neuroanesthesia and pain medicine – every issue also contains annotated references detailing the merits of the most important papers.
×
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