Complications with 25-gauge and 27-gauge Whitacre needles during combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labor

Needle size and shape may influence the incidence of paresthesias, post-dural puncture headache and other complications during combined spinal-epidural (CSE) procedures. We have noted a relatively high incidence of transient paresthesias during placement of the spinal needle during CSE for labor analgesia. The purpose of this study was to compare the occurrence of paresthesia and post-dural puncture headache in parturients who received CSE analgesia with either a 25-gauge or 27-gauge Whitacre needle. In a prospective observational study, data were gathered from 478 consecutive women receiving labor analgesia. Incidence, duration, and character of any paresthesias upon spinal needle placement and the incidence and treatment of headache were recorded. The incidence of paresthesia with the two needles was similar (16% with 25-gauge vs 15.4% with 27 gauge) but the incidence of post-dural puncture headache was higher with the 25-gauge needle (4% vs 0.7% with 27 gauge, P < 0.05). Our data suggest that with Whitacre needles, 27-gauge might be preferable to 25-gauge needles to reduce the rate of post-dural puncture headache in parturients but that they do not alter the incidence of transient paresthesias.     

A comparison of Espocan and Tuohy needles for the combined spinal-epidural technique for labor analgesia

When using the needle-through-needle combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique for labor analgesia, failure to obtain cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), paresthesias, and intrathecal or intravascular migration of the catheter are of concern. Epidural needles with spinal needle apertures, such as the back-hole Espocan (ES) needles, are available and may reduce these risks. We describe the efficacy and adverse events associated with a modified epidural needle (ES) versus a conventional Tuohy needle for CSE. One-hundred parturients requesting labor analgesia (CSE) were randomized into 2 groups: 50-ES 18-gauge modified epidural needle with 27-gauge Pencan atraumatic spinal needle, 50-conventional 18-gauge Tuohy needle with 27-gauge Gertie Marx atraumatic spinal needle. Information on intrathecal or intravascular catheter placement, paresthesia on introduction of spinal needle, failure to obtain CSF through the spinal needle after placement of epidural needle, unintentional dural puncture, and epidural catheter function was obtained. No intrathecal catheter placement occurred in either group. Rates of intravascular catheter placement and unintentional dural puncture were similar between the groups. Significant differences were noted regarding spinal needle-induced paresthesia (14% ES versus 42% Tuohy needles, P = 0.009) and failure to obtain CSF on first attempt (8% ES versus 28% Tuohy needles, P < 0.02). Use of ES needles for CSE significantly reduces paresthesia associated with the insertion of the spinal needle and is associated with more frequent successful spinal needle placement on the first attempt. IMPLICATIONS: The use of modified epidural needles with a back hole for combined spinal-epidural technique significantly reduces paresthesia associated with the insertion of the spinal needle and is associated with more frequent successful spinal needle placement on the first attempt.     

Headache after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section: a comparison of the 27-gauge Quincke and 24-gauge Sprotte needles.

A high incidence of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) occurs after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. To examine this problem, a study was conducted with the recently developed 24-gauge Sprotte and 27-gauge Quincke needles in patients undergoing elective and emergency cesarean section (n = 298). The needle to be used was assigned in a random manner: group I, 27-gauge Quincke (n = 147); group II, 24-gauge Sprotte (n = 151). During the postoperative period, patients were visited daily and asked specifically about the presence and severity of headache. The overall incidence of PDPH was 2% (n = 6), five in the Quincke group (3.5%) and one in the Sprotte group (0.7%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of PDPH between the two groups. Five headaches were classified as mild, and only one was moderate to severe. All headaches resolved quickly with conservative management and without blood patch. The authors conclude that the choice between a 27-gauge Quincke and a 24-gauge Sprotte needle does not influence the incidence of PDPH after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section.     

The reuse of 29-gauge spinal needles following combined spinal-epidural anesthesia]

The technique of combined spinal epidural anaesthesia (CSE) combines the versatility of spinal with the variability of epidural anaesthesia. Spinal application of the local anaesthetic achieves a fast response, reliable sensorial and motor block at a low dose with little toxicity. The epidural catheter allows for the duration of surgical anaesthesia to be extended and provides analgesia for the postoperative period. As the incidence of post dural puncture headache (PDPH) is inversely related to the size of the spinal needle, PDPH rarely or never occurs when 29 gauge needles are used. In 1775 parturients receiving spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section, Dittmann et al. [4] reported an incidence of PDPH of 1.37% with 29 gauge needles. The 29 gauge needle produced by Becton-Dickinson is the one now most frequently used for this technique. It is recommended that these needles be reused after resterilization. The objective of this study was to examine how clean 29 gauge spinal needles really are after resterilization. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Fifteen needles (29 gauge; Becton-Dickinson) were routinely used for combined spinal epidural anaesthesia. After identification of the epidural space at the L3-4 spinal segment with the 18 gauge Tuohy needle, the 29 gauge needle was advanced through the Tuohy needle. Immediately after use the needles were cleaned, rinsed with 20 ml distilled water, dried with pressurized air and subsequently resterilized in gas. Preparation of the used needles was in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations ("wash, rinse, dry, sterilize before initial and each subsequent use") and with generally accepted principles [6]. Two needles were additionally cleaned in an ultrasonic bath for 15 min. The needles were examined using a scanning electron microscope. After this analyses, eight needles were sterilized again and then taken for hygienic examination. They were incubated with trypticase soy broth and checked for bacterial growth. RESULTS. Scanning electron microscopy (ScEM) showed organic impurities on all needles. These impurities were equally distributed among all needles. Even the two cleaned in the ultrasonic bath were not free of organic particles. However, no material defects or damage could be seen. Hygienic evaluation proved sterility as no bacterial growth could be detected. CONCLUSION. Owing to the possibility of medico-legal consequences, which sometimes occur a long time after anaesthesia has been given, we think it is unwise to reuse such needles. We hope that disposable and cheap 29 gauge needles will soon become available.     

Accidental intrathecal sufentanil overdose during combined spinal-epidural analgesia for labor

A laboring woman was accidentally given 45 μg of sufentanil intrathecally in the course of combined spinal-epidural analgesia. She experienced intense pruritus and transient swallowing difficulty without respiratory depression, but still had incomplete pain relief, with delivery and episiotomy repair requiring additional analgesia. This case highlights the importance of adding local anesthetic to intrathecal opioids to facilitate effective analgesia during the second stage of labor. The contributory systems issues and multiple factors that allowed this error to occur are examined.     

腰-硬联合阻滞腰麻后硬膜外镇痛时机对分娩镇痛的影响

目的观察腰-硬联合阻滞(CSEA)腰麻后硬膜外镇痛时机对分娩镇痛的影响。方法选择ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,足月初产妇80例,于宫口开至2~3cm时实施CSEA镇痛。将入选产妇采用随机数字表法均分为E1组、E2组、E3组和E4组,分别于蛛网膜下腔给药后3、30、60和90min接受持续硬膜外给药。L3~4椎间隙行硬膜外穿刺,取25G腰麻穿刺针刺入蛛网膜下腔,见脑脊液后给予布比卡因2.5mg和芬太尼25μg,然后均采用PCEA模式。0.1%罗哌卡因与2μg/ml芬太尼混合液100ml加入电子镇痛泵,设置背景维持量为10ml/h,单次剂量为5ml,锁定时间15min。记录第一产程时间、第二产程时间、催产素使用率、分娩方式和不良反应发生情况,新生儿Apgar评分、脐动脉血气分析,以及产妇补救剂量和硬膜外用药总量。结果四组产妇产程、催产素使用率、分娩方式、新生儿Apgar评分、脐动脉血气分析差异均无统计学意义。E1、E2组需要PCA例数和次数明显少于、硬膜外罗哌卡因补救剂量明显低于E3、E4组(P<0.05)。结论蛛网膜下腔给药后30min以内开始硬膜外持续镇痛可以明显减少PCA次数和硬膜外罗哌卡因的补救剂量。     

腰麻-硬膜外联合阻滞应用于分娩镇痛的临床观察

目的　探讨腰麻 硬膜外联合阻滞 (CSEA)用于分娩镇痛的效果及对产程、母婴的影响。方法　选择 2 3 7例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级的足月初产妇行分娩镇痛为观察组 ;另选 2 0 0例条件相仿但不给分娩镇痛为对照组。观察组在蛛网膜下隙注入布比卡因 2mg和芬太尼 2 0 μg ;90分钟后硬膜外给予0 12 5 %罗比卡因和 2 μg/ml芬太尼行硬膜外病人自控镇痛 (PCEA)。其基础注药速度为 6ml/h ,冲击量为 2ml,锁定时间为 10分钟。用视觉模拟评分 (VAS)和下肢运动神经阻滞评分 (MBS)评估镇痛、阻滞效果 ,观察记录产妇的生命体征、产程时间、生产方式及新生儿Apgar评分。 结果　观察组产妇生命体征平稳 ,用药后 10分钟 99 2 %的产妇感到无痛 [VAS评分为 ( 0 0 4± 0 11)分 ],仅 0 8%的产妇镇痛不全。与镇痛前比较 ,观察组产妇MBS在腰麻后 10分钟显著增加 ,直至腰麻后 90分钟。观察组活跃期时间为 ( 96 3 4± 62 77)分钟 ,短于对照组 (P <0 0 1)。观察组第二产程时间 ( 5 3 15±2 5 70 )分钟 ,对照组为 ( 5 0 83± 2 4 81)分钟 (P >0 0 5 ) ;观察组新生儿出生后 1、5分钟Apgar评分、生产方式与对照组比较亦无统计学差异。结论　CSEA用于分娩镇痛效果确切 ,对运动神经阻滞轻 ,不影响产程及新生儿     

Comparison of the 25-gauge Whitacre with the 24-gauge Sprotte spinal needle for elective Caesarean section: cost implications

Spinal anaesthesia provides rapid, safe anaesthesia for Caesarean section. The pencil-point spinal needles (Sprotte and Whitacre) are reported to have a low incidence of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH). As the 25G Whitacre is less expensive than the 24G Sprotte needle, this prospective, randomized, doubleblind study was designed to compare the incidence of PDPH and ease of insertion of these needles in 304 ASA 1 and 2 women having elective Caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. Each patient was assessed daily for five consecutive days following Caesarean section by an investigator blinded to the needle used. The results indicate that the two needles have a similar ease of insertion, number of failed insertions, and failed subarachnoid blockade. An inability to insert the spinal needles occurred in two patients in each group. Therefore, 150 patients in each group completed the study. The incidence of PDPH with the 24G Sprotte needle was 4.0% (6/150) compared with 0.66% (1/150) with the 25G Whitacre (NS). There was no correlation between the occurrence of PDPH and the difficulty of needle insertion, presence of transient hypotension or the effectiveness of anaesthesia delivered. This study indicates that both needles are comparable with respect to ease of insertion and incidence of PDPH. As the Whitacre needle is less expensive it is a reasonable alternative to the more expensive Sprotte needle.     

Ambulation with combined spinal-epidural labor analgesia: the technique

The combined spinal-epidural labor analgesia technique (CSEA) has attained wide spread popularity in obstetric anesthesia worldwide. The onset of analgesia is rapid and reliable, and maternal satisfaction is high. While there still remains some concern about dural puncture, the CSEA technique offers many advantages to the parturient. For ambulatory labor analgesia the CSEA technique offers the possibility of combining rapid onset of subarachnoid analgesia with the flexibility of continuous epidural analgesia. This approach with the application of low-dose local anesthetic and/or opioid can provide a very selective sensory block with minimal motor blockade, allowing parturients to ambulate. This article will attempt to assess the validity of some strongly held opinions of whether CSEA offers any advantages for ambulatory labor analgesia as well as highlight some selected technical aspects and controversies of the CSEA specifically applicable to ambulatory labor analgesia.     

Prospective, randomized comparison of epidural and combined spinal epidural analgesia during labor.

The analgesic efficacy and incidence of maternal, fetal and neonatal side-effects of combined spinal epidural (CSE) and epidural (EPI) analgesia, using a mixture of bupivacaine 0.125%, epinephrine (1.25 micrograms.ml-1) and sufentanil (0.75 microgram.ml-1) for the relief of labor pain, were randomly and prospectively compared in 110 parturients. A 29 gauge Whitacre tip spinal needle was used to perforate the dura in CSE patients. Compared to EPI, CSE resulted in rapid (326 +/- 22 vs 766 +/- 79 sec, p < 0.05), excellent analgesia, using less bupivacaine (23.5 +/- 2.3 vs 33.9 +/- 2.9 mg, p < 0.05) and sufentanil (12.5 +/- 1.0 vs 16.5 +/- .7 micrograms, p < 0.05). A tendency to improved patient satisfaction in the CSE group was observed. The incidence of maternal or neonatal side effects was similar in both groups. No PDPH was observed. We conclude that CSE analgesia results in excellent pain relief during labor with immediate gratification as compared to epidural analgesia.     

A comparison of epidural infusions in the combined spinal/epidural technique for labor analgesia

We compared the clinical effects of three epidural infusions initiated after subarachnoid medication was administered as part of the combined spinal/epidural technique for labor analgesia. Fifteen minutes after administering subarachnoid fentanyl 25 microg and 1 mL of bupivacaine 0.25%, and 5 min after an epidural test dose of 3 mL of bupivacaine 0.25%, women were randomized to receive an epidural infusion of saline, bupivacaine 0.125%, bupivacaine 0.0625%, or bupivacaine 0.04% with epinephrine 1:600,000. All epidural infusions were started at 10 mL/h, and all except the Saline Group also received fentanyl 2 microg/mL. The end point of the study was delivery or request for additional medication for analgesia. We found that time until request for additional analgesia was longest in women who received bupivacaine 0.125% (median duration, 300 min) versus saline (median duration, 118 min) (P = 0.0001) and was intermediate for bupivacaine 0.0625% and bupivacaine 0.04% (median duration, 162 and 180 min, respectively) (P = 0.0001 versus saline). Women who received bupivacaine 0.125% had the most motor block. We conclude that all the bupivacaine-based infusions we tested maintained the analgesia from subarachnoid medication longer than saline, with the longest duration, but the most motor block, from bupivacaine 0.125%. IMPLICATIONS: In this prospective, randomized, and double-blinded study we found that initiating an epidural infusion of bupivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL at 10 mL/h 15 min after subarachnoid fentanyl 25 microg with 1 mL of bupivacaine 0.25%, followed by an epidural test dose of 3 mL of bupivacaine 0.25%, maintained the analgesia for longer but with more motor block than with either bupivacaine 0.04% or bupivacaine 0.0625%.     

罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼腰麻-硬膜外联合阻滞麻醉在分娩镇痛中的临床应用

目的 观察罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼腰麻顿膜外联合阻滞麻醉(combined spinal-epidural anesthesia,CSEA)用于分娩镇痛的临床效果. 方法 选择来我院分娩的初产妇120例,使用随机数字表法将其分为对照组和镇痛组,每组60例.对照组采用常规产科护理及处理的自然分娩方式,镇痛组在对照组护理、处理的基础上,采用CSEA分娩镇痛的方式.对两组产妇的镇痛效果、产程时间、产后出血量、分娩方式及新生儿Apgar评分进行对比观察,观察镇痛组的副作用. 结果 两组产妇镇痛前宫缩时视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);镇痛后镇痛组第一、第二、第三产程宫缩时的VAS评分均低于对照组(P＜0.05);镇痛组第一产程时间(194±40) min短于对照组(350±74) min(P＜0.05);镇痛组产妇剖宫产率(3.3％)低于对照组(15.0％)(P＜0.05);两组产妇产后出血量及新生儿出生后1、5、10 min时Apgar评分的比较,差异无统计学意义;镇痛组有6例产妇出现恶心,余未发现明显副作用. 结论 罗哌卡因复合舒芬太尼CSEA用于分娩镇痛能减轻产妇在分娩过程中的疼痛,缩短第一产程,降低剖宫产率,且对新生儿无损害,值得临床上广泛应用.     

Effect of combined spinal-epidural ambulatory labor analgesia on balance.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labor has proved popular with women because lower-limb motor power is preserved, allowing ambulation. However, there has been debate about the safety of allowing women to walk following low-dose regional analgesia because of somatosensory impairment. The authors undertook a prospective controlled observational study using computerized dynamic posturography to examine balance function in pregnant women after combined spinal-epidural analgesia. METHODS: The authors performed posturographic testing on 44 women in labor after institution of regional analgesia and compared them with a control group of 44 pregnant women. A separate group of six women were tested both before and after combined spinal-epidural analgesia. RESULTS: Neurologic examination after regional analgesia showed two parturients (4%) to have motor weakness (excluded from posturography). Four women (9%) had clinical dorsal column sensory loss; these women all completed posturography. The spinal-epidural analgesia group showed a small, statistically significant reduction in one of six posturographic sensory-organization tests; however, this difference was functionally minor. There were no other differences in posturography between the control and spinal-epidural groups. Similar results were found in the paired study, in which there was minimal change in balance function after spinal-epidural analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to objectively examine the effect of spinal-epidural analgesia on balance function. Using computerized dynamic posturography, the authors were unable to find any functional impairment of balance function after spinal-epidural ambulatory analgesia in women in labor who had no clinical evidence of motor block.     

Responses to dural puncture during institution of combined spinal-epidural analgesia: a comparison of 27 gauge pencil-point and 27 gauge cutting-edge needles

Pencil-point spinal needles are popular for combined spinal-epidural analgesia because they cause less dural puncture headache than cutting-edge spinal needles. However many parturients move, grimace, vocalise or experience paraesthesia or dysaesthesia during dural puncture when performing 'needle through needle' combined spinal-epidural analgesia. We compared dural puncture responses induced by pencil-point and cutting-edge needles (both 27 gauge). With institutional approval, 115 parturients presenting for elective caesarean section or labour analgesia were audited. After lignocaine infiltration, a Tuohy-type needle was inserted to loss of resistance to saline at a mid-lumbar interspace, and either a 27 gauge cutting-edge or 27 gauge pencil-point needle was inserted 'needle through needle' through the dura. During dural penetration, the occurrence of patient movement, grimacing or vocalisation was noted by a blinded observer, as was the patient's response to the question "Did you feel that?" asked by the anaesthetist. The audit comprised two similar groups of patients (caesarean section, n=30; labour analgesia, n=85). In both groups, grimacing and movement during thecal penetration occurred more frequently with pencil-point needles (P < 0.05 and P < 0.025, respectively). Pooled data analysis revealed that pencil-point and cutting-edge needles induced grimacing and movement in 17 (22%) and 2 (5%), spontaneous vocalisation in 4 (5%) and 1 (3%) and was perceived by 13 (17%) and 3 (8%) parturients (P < 0.025, P=NS, P=NS), respectively. Overall, 34 and 6 objective and subjective patient responses (P < 0.005) occurred when inserting these needles, respectively. Dural puncture by a 27 gauge pencil-point needle inserted 'needle through needle' when instituting combined spinal-epidural analgesia induces more iatrogenic responses than a 27 gauge cutting-edge needle.     

Comparison of 2 techniques for combined spinal-epidural analgesia for advanced labor in childbirth

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether using a needle-locking device in combined spinal-epidural analgesia leads to better quality of pain relief for advanced stages of obstetric labor than can be achieved with conventional materials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 230 women in advanced labor were randomized to 2 groups. In both groups the needle-through-needle technique was used. In group N we used a new technique with a Tuohy needle and a system for locking the spinal needle (27-gauge, pencil-point design). The conventional technique (group C) made use of the same Tuohy needle and spinal needle without the needle-locking device. The variables considered were patient characteristics, anesthesiologist, number of attempts and level of difficulty in carrying out the procedure, pain on a simple verbal visual analog scale before the procedure and 5 minutes later, latency, motor block, duration of spinal analgesia, complications, type of expulsion, and maternal satisfaction. RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar with respect to all studied variables except duration of spinal analgesia (longer in group N, P<0.001); VAS after 5 minutes (lower in group N, P<0.010); latency (shorter in group N, P<0.001); lateralization (less in group N, P=0.034), and maternal satisfaction (greater in group N, P=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: The use of devices specifically designed for administering combined spinal-epidural analgesia in advanced stages of labor provides faster pain relief, longer duration of analgesia, and greater maternal satisfaction without increasing the incidence of complications.     

腰-硬联合阻滞在潜伏期分娩镇痛中的研究进展

腰-硬联合阻滞应用于分娩镇痛是目前最有效也是最值得推荐的分娩镇痛方式之一，对产妇和新生儿的不良反应相对较小。腰-硬联合阻滞应用于第一产程潜伏期行分娩镇痛在国内外尚存争议，Thorp等不支持潜伏期即介入镇痛，认为可使产程延长，但并未设立对照组；潜伏期占第一产程约2／3的时间。平均9小时以上，严重的疼痛刺激对母婴均产生不良影响，Nelson等主张于潜伏期即介入镇痛，并设立对照组观察到对产妇及新生儿并无不良反应。总之，分娩疼痛应是首要考虑的问题，因此主张只要没有禁息症，应根据产妇意愿决定何时进行分娩镇痛，让我们共同为尽早实现“人人享有生殖健康”而不懈努力。     

曲马多静脉PCA与腰麻-硬膜外联合麻醉后病人自控镇痛用于分娩镇痛的比较

目的 通过与腰麻-硬膜外联合麻醉(CSEA)后病人自控硬膜外镇痛法(PCEA)进行比较,观察曲马多病人自控静脉镇痛法(PCIA)用于分娩镇痛的效果及其对分娩过程和胎儿的影响。方法 选择单胎足月初产妇80例,随机分为3组。对照组(n=30)按产科常规处理,未行分娩镇痛。A组(n=30):蛛网膜下腔注射罗哌卡因2.5mg+芬太尼5μg,然后连接硬膜外镇痛泵,PCEA输注0.1％罗哌卡因与芬太尼1.5μg/ml,单次剂量4ml,锁定时间15min,背景剂量4ml/h;B组(n=20):先静脉注射1mg/kg负荷量的曲马多,然后连接静脉镇痛泵,PCIA输注0.75％曲马多,单次剂量2 ml,锁定时间10min,背景剂量2 ml/h,总剂量不超过500 mg。连续监测呼吸循环情况,采用视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS)评估镇痛效应,运动阻滞程度按改良的Bromage标准进行测定,观察记录产程进展、宫缩及胎心情况、新生儿情况及不良反应。结果 第一产程中A、B组的VAS评分分别为33±13、47±23,与对照组比较,显著减低(P<0.01),A、B组间也有显著性差异(P<0.05);第二产程A、B组的VAS评分分别为39±22、51±27,与对照组比较,仍显著减低(P<0.01),但A、B组间无显著性差异。A组的镇痛起效时间(2.4±1.2)min快于B组(5.3±2.7)min(P<0.05)。B组新生儿各时点Apgar评分均低于A组(P<0.05)。A组的第二产程(67±51)min较