Intrathecal catheterisation after observed accidental dural puncture in labouring women: update of a meta-analysis and a trial-sequential analysis

BackgroundOur meta-analysis from 2013 showed that inserting a catheter intrathecally after an observed accidental dural puncture can reduce the need for epidural blood patch in labouring women requesting epidural analgesia. We updated our conventional meta-analysis and added a trial-sequential analysis (TSA).MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies that compared inserting the catheter intrathecally with an epidural catheter re-site or with no intervention. The extracted data were pooled and the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) for the incidence of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) was calculated, using the random effects model. A contour-enhanced funnel plot was constructed. A TSA was performed and the cumulative Z score, monitoring and futility boundaries were constructed.ResultsOur search identified 13 studies, reporting on 1653 patients, with a low risk of bias. The RR for the incidence of PDPH was 0.82 (95%CI 0.71 to 0.95) and the RR for the need for epidural blood patch was 0.62 (95%CI 0.49 to 0.79); heterogeneity of both analyses was high. The TSA showed that the monitoring or futility boundaries were not crossed, indicating insufficient data to exclude a type I error of statistical analysis. Contour-enhanced funnel plots were symmetric, suggesting no publication bias.ConclusionsConventional meta-analyses showed for the first time that intrathecal catheterisation can reduce the incidence of PDPH. However, TSA did not corroborate this finding. Despite increasing use in clinical practice there is no firm evidence on which to base a definite conclusion.     

Analysis of Efficacy Differences between Caudal and Lumbar Interlaminar Epidural Injections in Chronic Lumbar Axial Discogenic Pain: Local Anesthetic Alone vs. Local Combined with Steroids

Study Design: Comparative assessment of randomized controlled trials of caudal and lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in chronic lumbar discogenic pain.Objective: To assess the comparative efficacy of caudal and lumbar interlaminar approaches of epidural injections in managing axial or discogenic low back pain.Summary of Background Data: Epidural injections are commonly performed utilizing either a caudal or lumbar interlaminar approach to treat chronic lumbar axial or discogenic pain, which is pain exclusive of that associated with a herniated intervertebral disc, or that is due to degeneration of the zygapophyseal joints, or due to dysfunction of the sacroiliac joints, respectively. The literature on the efficacy of epidural injections in managing chronic axial lumbar pain of presumed discogenic origin is limited.Methods: The present analysis is based on 2 randomized controlled trials of chronic axial low back pain not caused by disc herniation, radiculitis, or facet joint pain, utilizing either a caudal or lumbar interlaminar approach, with a total of 240 patients studied, and a 24-month follow-up. Patients were assigned to receive either local anesthetic only or local anesthetic with a steroid in each 60 patient group.Results: The primary outcome measure was significant improvement, defined as pain relief and functional status improvement of at least 50% from baseline, which was reported at 24-month follow-ups in 72% who received local anesthetic only with a lumbar interlaminar approach and 54% who received local anesthetic only with a caudal approach. In patients receiving local anesthetic with a steroid, the response rate was 67% for those who had a lumbar interlaminar approach and 68% for those who had a caudal approach at 12 months. The response was significantly better in the lumbar interlaminar group who received local anesthetic only, 77% versus 56% at 12 months and 72% versus 54% at 24 months.Conclusion: This assessment shows that in patients with axial or discogenic pain in the lumbar spine after excluding facet joint and SI Joint pain, epidural injections of local anesthetic by the caudal or lumbar interlaminar approach may be effective in managing chronic low back pain with a potential superiority for a lumbar interlaminar approach over a caudal approach.     

观察危重症儿童患者应用桡动脉置管有创血压监测的护理效果

目的观察危重症儿童患者应用桡动脉置管有创血压监测的护理效果。方法选择2012年1月~2013年12月收治的40例危重症儿童患者作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组,各20例。对照组采用无创血压监测。观察组采用有创血压监测。比较两组血压监测结果。结果观察组动脉血压(73.21±12.97)mmHg,对照组为(69.18±12.01)mmHg,两组比较有显著性差异(P0.05)。观察组平均舒张压(36.79±8.81)mmHg,对照组为(41.27±9.09)mmHg,两组比较有显著性差异(P0.05)。观察组平均血压(48.97±11.27)mmHg,对照组为(49.87±9.37)mmHg,两组比较无显著性差异(P0.05)。结论临床应用桡动脉置管有创血压监测可及时了解危重症儿童患者血压情况,以便临床及时调整治疗方案,提高临床疗效。     

中心静脉导管维护每日核查表的设计及临床应用

目的通过设计中心静脉导管维护"每日核查表"以加强护理人员对中心静脉导管护理的操作规范,降低导管相关并发症的发生。方法选择2016年10月至2017年9月在广州两家三级甲等综合医院使用"每日核查表"进行护理的留置中心静脉导管的住院患者1500例为观察组;回顾性统计2015年10月至2016年9月在这两家医院住院未使用"每日核查表"进行护理的留置中心静脉导管的住院患者1500例为对照组。观察及比较两组患者中心静脉导管相关血流感染(central line associated blood stream infection,CLABSI)、非计划性拔管(unplanned extubation,UEX)发生情况及使用"每日核查表"前后护士导管维护规范操作执行情况。结果观察组CLABSI发生率和UEX发生率分别为0.47%、0.73%低于对照组的0.87%和1.06%,两组比较,差异有统计学意义(χ^2分别为6.83、8.62,P<0.05)。使用"每日核查表"后护士导管维护规范操作总的执行率为98.21%较"每日核查表"前83.04%高,差异有统计学意义(χ^2=17.90,P<0.01)。结论采用"每日核查表",有效地提高了中心静脉导管维护措施的落实,降低了中心静脉导管相关性血流感染和非计划性拔管的发生率,保证了患者安全。该方法简单、可操作性强,护士接受程度高,值得临床推广应用。     

硬膜外间歇脉冲注射镇痛模式中罗哌卡因 分娩镇痛效果及最适宜浓度研究

目的 探讨硬膜外间歇脉冲注射（intermittent epidural bolus，IEB）镇痛模式中罗哌卡因的分娩镇痛效果及最适宜浓度。方法 选择2021年1月至2022年1月龙港市人民医院收治的接受IEB镇痛的健康初产妇120例，按罗哌卡因使用浓度分为低浓度组（0.075%罗哌卡因）、中浓度组（0.1%罗哌卡因）、高浓度组（0.125%罗哌卡因），每组各40例。记录3组产妇在镇痛前、镇痛后1～7h、分娩时及分娩后1h的疼痛视觉模拟评分法（visual analogue scales，VAS）评分。采用Bromage评分评估3组产妇椎管内麻醉运动神经阻滞效应。记录3组产妇的产程时间、罗哌卡因总量、舒芬太尼总量、缩宫素使用情况、总满意度及新生儿Apgar评分。结果 镇痛后随产程进展，3组产妇的VAS均逐渐升高，其中低浓度组VAS相对较高；3组中除镇痛后1h外的其他时间点VAS，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）；分娩时，3组VAS均达到最高，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。镇痛后1～7h，中浓度、高浓度组中Bromage评分1分的产妇占比均高于低浓度组，高浓度组中Bromage评分0分的产妇占比低于低浓度组，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）；分娩时及分娩后1h，高浓度组Bromage评分1分的产妇占比高于低浓度组，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。3组产妇产程时间、罗哌卡因用量、舒芬太尼用量、使用缩宫素患者占比、总满意度、新生儿出生1min及5min的Apgar评分比较，差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 采用0.1%罗哌卡因联合0.4μg/ml舒芬太尼的IEB镇痛模式可达到起效时间短、疼痛感觉阻滞完全、下肢运动神经阻滞少的目的，且不影响产程时间、宫缩以及新生儿Apgar评分，同时还减少了硬膜外用药的总量，提高了麻醉的安全性和产妇满意度。