Ultrasound-guided Versus Landmark-based Spinal Anesthesia in Obese Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Section (USLMCSEOB)
Ultrasound-guided Versus Landmark-based Spinal Anesthesia in Obese Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Section: a Prospective Comparative Study
Spinal anesthesia is the most commonly used anesthetic technique for cesarean section. However, in obese parturients, identification of the optimal puncture site using anatomical landmark palpation can be challenging because of altered anatomy. Preprocedural ultrasound has been proposed as a tool to improve localization of the puncture site and facilitate neuraxial access.
This is a prospective comparative study included 100 obese parturients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Participants were allocated to one of two comparison groups according to the puncture site localization technique: a preprocedural ultrasound group and an anatomical landmark palpation group.
The primary outcome is the first-attempt success rate, defined as successful cerebrospinal fluid return after the first needle insertion without needle redirection or a new skin puncture. Secondary outcomes include the number of puncture attempts, needle redirections, need for rescue interventions, incidence of paresthesia and vascular puncture during the procedure, and procedural times.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
This prospective comparative study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of preprocedural ultrasound-guided marking compared with the conventional anatomical landmark palpation technique for spinal anesthesia in obese parturients undergoing cesarean section.
A total of 100 parturients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m² were prospectively allocated to one of two comparison groups according to the puncture site localization technique. In the ultrasound group, the puncture site was identified using preprocedural ultrasound to determine the optimal intervertebral space and needle insertion trajectory. In the landmark group, the puncture site was identified using conventional anatomical landmark palpation.
The primary outcome was the first-attempt success rate, defined as successful cerebrospinal fluid return after the first needle insertion without needle redirection or an additional skin puncture. Secondary outcomes included the number of puncture attempts, needle redirections, need for rescue interventions, incidence of paresthesia and vascular puncture during needle insertion, and procedural times (site identification time, puncture time, and total procedure time).
This study evaluated whether preprocedural ultrasound-guided marking improves the technical performance of spinal anesthesia compared with conventional anatomical landmark palpation in obese parturients undergoing cesarean section.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Lima Province
-
Lima, Lima Province, Peru, 15001
- National Maternal and Perinatal Institute
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Pregnant women undergoing cesarean section
- Body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m² at the time of cesarean section
- Scheduled for cesarean section under spinal anesthesia
Exclusion Criteria:
- Congenital spinal deformities
- History of spinal surgery
- Coagulopathy
- Infection at the puncture site
- Allergy to local anesthetics
- Emergency cesarean section (NICE category 1)
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Non-Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Ultrasound-guided group
Preprocedural ultrasound was used to identify and mark the optimal puncture site in obese parturients undergoing cesarean section (n = 50).
|
Preprocedural ultrasound is used to identify and mark the optimal puncture site before spinal anesthesia.
|
|
Active Comparator: Landmark-based group
The puncture site was identified using anatomical landmark palpation in obese parturients undergoing cesarean section (n = 50)
|
The puncture site is identified using anatomical landmark palpation before spinal anesthesia.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
First-attempt success rate of spinal anesthesia
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Successful cerebrospinal fluid return after the first needle insertion without redirection.
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Number of puncture attempts
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Total number of needle insertions required to achieve successful spinal anesthesia
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
|
Number of needle redirections
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Number of needle redirections during a single puncture attempt
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
|
Need for rescue intervention
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Requirement of assistance by a more experienced operator to complete the procedure
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
|
Incidence of paresthesia
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Occurrence of paresthesia during needle insertion
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
|
Incidence of vascular puncture
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Occurrence of vascular puncture during needle insertion
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
|
Total procedure time
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Time from initial identification of the puncture site to successful cerebrospinal fluid return
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
|
Puncture time
Time Frame: During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Time from needle insertion to successful cerebrospinal fluid return
|
During the spinal anesthesia procedure
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Eddisson R Quispe Pilco, MD, National Maternal and Perinatal Institute
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Perlas A, Chaparro LE, Chin KJ. Lumbar Neuraxial Ultrasound for Spinal and Epidural Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Mar-Apr;41(2):251-60. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000184.
- Li M, Ni X, Xu Z, Shen F, Song Y, Li Q, Liu Z. Ultrasound-Assisted Technology Versus the Conventional Landmark Location Method in Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery in Obese Parturients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Anesth Analg. 2019 Jul;129(1):155-161. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003795.
- Khoo AK, Huynh A, Pelecanos A, Eley VA. Does preprocedural ultrasound prior to lumbar neuraxial anesthesia or analgesia increase first-pass success in adults with obesity? A systematic review. Health Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 6;7(11):e70039. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.70039. eCollection 2024 Nov.
- Zhang Y, Peng M, Wei J, Huang J, Ma W, Li Y. Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2023 Nov 2;13(11):e071253. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071253.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 0107-DG-0080-OEAIDE-I
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
IPD Sharing Time Frame
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
- SAP
- ICF
- ANALYTIC_CODE
- CSR
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.