A Prospective Observational Study Comparing Computer-Assisted Paramedian Approach Versus Conventional Midline Approach for Lumbar Puncture

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the effects of CMPAT and MAT in patients undergoing LP. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the CMPAT treatment group (group A) or the MAT treatment group (group B). Researchers will compare CMPAT treatment group and the MAT treatment group to see if the number of needle insertion attempts required for a successful LP, the puncture success rate, pain assessment in the back, head, and legs, and the occurrence of complications have different.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

84

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

  • Name: Yuan-Dong Zhuang
  • Phone Number: 15260866029
  • Email: zyd2013@qq.com

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Aged 18-99 years. Indication for lumber puncture (diagnostic lumbar puncture, analysis of cerebrospinal fluid composition, measurement of cerebrospinal fluid pressure, release of cerebrospinal fluid, lumbar cistern drain-age or intrathecal injection).

Body mass index between 18.5 and 35 kg/m2.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Cerebral hernia or known high cerebrospinal fluid pressure prone to cerebral hernia.
  • Oral anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy (≤3 days) or coagulation dysfunction, various factors lead to a higher risk of bleeding.
  • Active infection or prior infection at the surgical site.
  • Skin breakdown.
  • Previous spine fusion surgery.
  • Cauda equina syndrome.
  • Pregnancy or breast feeding.
  • Severe comorbid medical or psychiatric disorder.
  • Unwilling to adhere to any of the required procedures.
  • Cognitive impairment interfering with participant's ability to give full and - - informed consent or complete the baseline or follow-up assessments.
  • Survival expectation less than 1 month.
  • Moving abroad in 1 month.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Conventional Midline Approach Technique
Puncture will be performed on the posterior median line near the midpoint of the L3-4 Space of spinous process. The lumbar puncture needle will be inserted vertically along the axis of the anesthesia needle, or the tip of the needle will be tilted 15° in the sagittal direction toward the head, so that the needle path is parallel to the space of spinous process.
Conventional Midline Approach Technique
Experimental: Computer-Assisted Paramedian Approac Technique
The L3-4 inter-laminar space will be selected as the target for puncture, and in the longitudinal direction, 1.0-1.5cm will be opened beside the upper edge of the spinous process (tip) of the lower vertebra as the entry point. The lumbar puncture needle will be inserted vertically along the axis of the anesthesia needle. The puncture path will be maintained completely perpendicular to the skin until the needle reached the PLTLF (posterior layer of the thoracolumbar fascia), where some resistance will be felt. The puncture direction is adjusted as needed. The tip of the needle will be tilted 20±10° in the sagittal direction and 15±5° inward such that the tip will point at the midpoint of the spinal canal. After the needle reaches the PLTLF, it will be further inserted 3-7 cm.
Computer-Assisted Paramedian Approach Technique

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of needle insertion attempts for successful LP
Time Frame: 30 minutes following treatment
A successful puncture was defined as the presence of CSF outflow from the puncture needle. The number of needle insertion attempts was determined by the number of times the puncture needle was inserted into the target area.
30 minutes following treatment

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
LP success rate
Time Frame: 30 minutes following treatment
The parameters will measure the success rate of puncture in one attempt, the success rate of puncture within three attempts and the success rate of puncture within six attempts.
30 minutes following treatment
Assessment of back, head and leg pain using the NRS
Time Frame: before treatment, during surgery and 30 minutes,6 hours,1 days,3 days,7 days,2 weeks,4 weeks following treatment
In the NRS, patients will be asked to indicate a number ranging from 0 to 10, which best reflects the intensity of their pain. A score of 0 indicates the absence of pain, while a score of 10 signifies the most excruciating pain imaginable. The NRS will be used to assess the severity of localised back pain, headaches, leg pain and numbness experienced by patients after LP.
before treatment, during surgery and 30 minutes,6 hours,1 days,3 days,7 days,2 weeks,4 weeks following treatment
Adverse events and other unintended effects
Time Frame: during surgery and 30 minutes,6 hours,1 days,3 days,7 days,2 weeks,4 weeks following treatment
This study will monitor all adverse events during and after trial interventions, followed by causality assessment. In addition to risk mitigation protocols, we will remain vigilant about rare potential complications including drug allergies during anaesthesia; adjacent organ/ tissue injury; nerve, vascular or organ damage; paralysis, shock; difficulties/failures in puncture; needle breakage; persistent pain; neurological impairment; infections; CSF leakage; wound healing issues; epidural haematoma, etc. Their likelihood is extremely low under specialised surgical expertise.Any undesirable medical condition will be documented and reported transparently per ethics guidelines. The data safety monitoring board may recommend modifying/stopping the trial if safety concerns emerge. We will ensure diligent surveillance and injury precautions to safeguard participants.
during surgery and 30 minutes,6 hours,1 days,3 days,7 days,2 weeks,4 weeks following treatment

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Locating time
Time Frame: 30 minutes following treatment
The time taken to locate and mark the patient, defined as the duration from the beginning of positioning till the insertion of the anaesthetic needle.
30 minutes following treatment
Puncture time
Time Frame: 30 minutes following treatment
The time taken to perform the LP defined as the duration from the first insertion of the puncture needle till the beginning of the outflow of CSF from the puncture needle.
30 minutes following treatment
Evaluation from physician
Time Frame: 30 minutes following treatment
The methods for assessing LP immediately after physician evaluation are categorised as follows: very good, good, average, bad and very bad.
30 minutes following treatment
Evaluation from patient
Time Frame: 30 minutes following treatment
Patient satisfaction, rated by patients immediately after LP, is classified as very good, good, average, bad or very bad.
30 minutes following treatment

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

October 28, 2024

Primary Completion (Estimated)

October 28, 2025

Study Completion (Estimated)

October 28, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 14, 2024

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 14, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

May 17, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

May 17, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 14, 2024

Last Verified

February 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

Clinical Trials on Spinal Puncture

Clinical Trials on Conventional Midline Approach Technique

Subscribe