Ultrasonography-guided catheter-over-needle insertion for caudal epidural catheter placement in adults: technical considerations.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pei Zhang, Hongzhou Chen, Keqiang Yu, Xia Ran, Rurong Wang, Jing Wu
{"title":"Ultrasonography-guided catheter-over-needle insertion for caudal epidural catheter placement in adults: technical considerations.","authors":"Pei Zhang, Hongzhou Chen, Keqiang Yu, Xia Ran, Rurong Wang, Jing Wu","doi":"10.1186/s12871-025-02889-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Caudal epidural analgesia significantly reduces acute pain after anorectal surgery; however, caudal epidural catheter placement (CECP) remains challenging, and the safety of real-time ultrasonography-guided CECP is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate and related complications of real-time ultrasonography-guided CECP and describe the technical considerations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, single-center observational study included 233 patients catheterized in the left lateral decubitus position. The sacral hiatus was palpated and then confirmed using ultrasonography. A catheter-over-needle was inserted through the sacrococcygeal ligament under real-time ultrasonographic guidance, the metallic needle was withdrawn through the outer sleeve, and the epidural catheter was placed through the outer sleeve into the sacral canal epidural space. The primary outcome was the success rate of CECP; several surgical variables, the incidence of related complications, and improvement measures were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CECP through the sacral hiatus was successful in 231 patients. The sacral canal depth at the hiatus apex, the mean distance between the sacral cornua, and the distance from the skin to the inferior margin of the sacrococcygeal ligament were 5.07 ± 1.38, 8.00 ± 1.94, and 14.24 ± 4.18 mm, respectively. The sacral canal depth was > 3 mm in 94.4% of patients. No complications, such as epidural hematoma, dura puncture, and intraspinal infection during postoperative epidural catheter utilization, occurred.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ultrasonography-guided CECP through the sacral hiatus is a simple, feasible, safe, and effective technique for postoperative anorectal analgesia. Additionally, caudal epidural analgesia manages severe pain after anorectal surgery. Therefore, this technology merits comprehensive clinical application.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>No. ChiCTR 2,000,038,918.</p>","PeriodicalId":9190,"journal":{"name":"BMC Anesthesiology","volume":"25 1","pages":"149"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11963432/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-025-02889-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Caudal epidural analgesia significantly reduces acute pain after anorectal surgery; however, caudal epidural catheter placement (CECP) remains challenging, and the safety of real-time ultrasonography-guided CECP is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate and related complications of real-time ultrasonography-guided CECP and describe the technical considerations.

Methods: This prospective, single-center observational study included 233 patients catheterized in the left lateral decubitus position. The sacral hiatus was palpated and then confirmed using ultrasonography. A catheter-over-needle was inserted through the sacrococcygeal ligament under real-time ultrasonographic guidance, the metallic needle was withdrawn through the outer sleeve, and the epidural catheter was placed through the outer sleeve into the sacral canal epidural space. The primary outcome was the success rate of CECP; several surgical variables, the incidence of related complications, and improvement measures were also assessed.

Results: CECP through the sacral hiatus was successful in 231 patients. The sacral canal depth at the hiatus apex, the mean distance between the sacral cornua, and the distance from the skin to the inferior margin of the sacrococcygeal ligament were 5.07 ± 1.38, 8.00 ± 1.94, and 14.24 ± 4.18 mm, respectively. The sacral canal depth was > 3 mm in 94.4% of patients. No complications, such as epidural hematoma, dura puncture, and intraspinal infection during postoperative epidural catheter utilization, occurred.

Conclusion: Ultrasonography-guided CECP through the sacral hiatus is a simple, feasible, safe, and effective technique for postoperative anorectal analgesia. Additionally, caudal epidural analgesia manages severe pain after anorectal surgery. Therefore, this technology merits comprehensive clinical application.

Trial registration number: No. ChiCTR 2,000,038,918.

超声引导下针上置管在成人尾侧硬膜外置管中的应用:技术考虑。
背景:尾侧硬膜外镇痛可显著减轻肛肠手术后急性疼痛;然而,尾侧硬膜外置管(CECP)仍然具有挑战性,实时超声引导下的CECP的安全性尚不确定。本研究旨在评估实时超声引导下CECP的成功率和相关并发症,并描述技术注意事项。方法:这项前瞻性、单中心观察性研究纳入233例左侧卧位置管患者。经触诊及超声检查证实为骶裂孔。在实时超声引导下,经骶尾骨韧带插入套针导管,金属针经外套管取出,硬膜外导管经外套管置入骶管硬膜外间隙。主要观察指标为CECP的成功率;几个手术变量,相关并发症的发生率和改善措施也进行了评估。结果:经骶裂孔行CECP 231例成功。骶管裂孔尖端深度为5.07±1.38 mm,骶角间平均距离为8.00±1.94 mm,骶尾韧带下缘皮肤距骶尾韧带下缘平均距离为14.24±4.18 mm。94.4%的患者骶管深度为30mm。术后使用硬膜外导管过程中未发生硬膜外血肿、硬膜穿刺、椎管内感染等并发症。结论:超声引导下经骶裂孔CECP是一种简便、可行、安全、有效的术后肛肠镇痛技术。此外,尾侧硬膜外镇痛处理肛肠手术后的严重疼痛。因此,该技术值得临床全面应用。试验登记号:ChiCTR 2000038918。
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
BMC Anesthesiology
BMC Anesthesiology ANESTHESIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
349
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Anesthesiology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of anesthesiology, critical care, perioperative care and pain management, including clinical and experimental research into anesthetic mechanisms, administration and efficacy, technology and monitoring, and associated economic issues.
×
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