Effective prevention of post-dural puncture headache with insertion of an intrathecal catheter in parturients: a retrospective study and meta-analysis.

F Creazzola, M Aversano, F Prencipe, R Barelli, P Pasqualetti, I Simonelli, M G Frigo
{"title":"Effective prevention of post-dural puncture headache with insertion of an intrathecal catheter in parturients: a retrospective study and meta-analysis.","authors":"F Creazzola,&nbsp;M Aversano,&nbsp;F Prencipe,&nbsp;R Barelli,&nbsp;P Pasqualetti,&nbsp;I Simonelli,&nbsp;M G Frigo","doi":"10.1186/s44158-023-00107-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accidental dural puncture is a common complication of labour analgesia. It can trigger post-dural puncture headache, with associated morbidity and increased costs. Intrathecal catheter placement is a prophylactic procedure which can reduce incidence and severity of post-dural puncture headache.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective single-centred study to define incidence and risk factors of accidental dural puncture and post-dural puncture headache in an obstetric population. We also evaluated effectiveness of intrathecal catheter placement compared to epidural catheter replacement in reducing incidence of post-dural puncture headache. We then conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis which included all studies comparing intrathecal catheter placement to epidural catheter replacement in obstetric patients with accidental dural puncture assessing the outcome of reduced incidence of post-dural puncture headache as a dichotomous variable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Accidental dural puncture had an incidence of 0.25% (60 cases). Of these, 66% developed post-dural puncture headache. A total of 77% (47/60) of patients with accidental dural puncture were treated with an intrathecal catheter placement, while 23% (13/60) had an epidural catheter replacement. Incidence of post-dural puncture headache was lower in the intrathecal catheter group (spinal 26/47, 60.5% epidural 11/13, 84.6%), although not reaching statistical significance (RR 0.71, CI 95%: 0.51-1.00; p = 0.049). The meta-analysis revealed that intrathecal catheter placement significantly reduced incidence of post-dural puncture headache compared to epidural catheter replacement (pooled RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.91, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intrathecal catheter placement is a promising measure to prevent post-dural puncture headache, especially if followed by a pain management protocol and a continuous saline infusion.</p>","PeriodicalId":73597,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10357735/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-023-00107-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Accidental dural puncture is a common complication of labour analgesia. It can trigger post-dural puncture headache, with associated morbidity and increased costs. Intrathecal catheter placement is a prophylactic procedure which can reduce incidence and severity of post-dural puncture headache.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-centred study to define incidence and risk factors of accidental dural puncture and post-dural puncture headache in an obstetric population. We also evaluated effectiveness of intrathecal catheter placement compared to epidural catheter replacement in reducing incidence of post-dural puncture headache. We then conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis which included all studies comparing intrathecal catheter placement to epidural catheter replacement in obstetric patients with accidental dural puncture assessing the outcome of reduced incidence of post-dural puncture headache as a dichotomous variable.

Results: Accidental dural puncture had an incidence of 0.25% (60 cases). Of these, 66% developed post-dural puncture headache. A total of 77% (47/60) of patients with accidental dural puncture were treated with an intrathecal catheter placement, while 23% (13/60) had an epidural catheter replacement. Incidence of post-dural puncture headache was lower in the intrathecal catheter group (spinal 26/47, 60.5% epidural 11/13, 84.6%), although not reaching statistical significance (RR 0.71, CI 95%: 0.51-1.00; p = 0.049). The meta-analysis revealed that intrathecal catheter placement significantly reduced incidence of post-dural puncture headache compared to epidural catheter replacement (pooled RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.91, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Intrathecal catheter placement is a promising measure to prevent post-dural puncture headache, especially if followed by a pain management protocol and a continuous saline infusion.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

硬膜穿刺后头痛的有效预防:一项回顾性研究和荟萃分析。
背景:意外硬脑膜穿刺是分娩镇痛的常见并发症。它可引发硬脑膜穿刺后头痛,伴有相关的发病率和费用增加。硬脊膜内置管是一种预防措施,可减少硬脊膜穿刺后头痛的发生率和严重程度。方法:我们进行了一项回顾性单中心研究,以确定产科人群中意外硬脑膜穿刺和硬脑膜穿刺后头痛的发生率和危险因素。我们还评估了硬膜内置管与硬膜外置管在减少硬膜穿刺后头痛发生率方面的有效性。然后,我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,其中包括所有比较硬膜穿刺患者硬膜内置管与硬膜外置管的研究,以评估硬膜穿刺后头痛发生率降低的结果作为二分类变量。结果:意外硬脑膜穿刺60例,发生率0.25%。其中,66%的患者出现硬脊膜穿刺后头痛。共有77%(47/60)的意外硬膜穿刺患者采用硬膜内置管治疗,23%(13/60)的患者采用硬膜外置管治疗。硬膜穿刺后头痛发生率硬膜内置管组较低(脊髓组26/47,60.5%硬膜外组11/13,84.6%),但无统计学意义(RR 0.71, CI 95%: 0.51-1.00;p = 0.049)。荟萃分析显示,与硬膜外置管相比,硬膜内置管可显著降低硬膜穿刺后头痛的发生率(合并RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.91, p)。结论:硬膜内置管是预防硬膜穿刺后头痛的一种有希望的措施,特别是在疼痛管理方案和持续盐水输注的情况下。
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
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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