Correlation between spinous process dimensions and ease of spinal anaesthesia

Hariharan Shankar, Kanishka Rajput, Karthik Murugiah, Hariharan Shankar, Kanishka Rajput, Karthik Murugiah

Abstract

Background: Neuraxial anaesthesia, despite being a common technique, may pose some technical challenges leading to complications such as post-dural puncture headache, trauma to neural structures and neuraxial haematoma. We hypothesised that the interspinous gap (ISG) and the spinous process width (SPW) could be used as objective measures to predict ease of access to the neuraxial space.

Methods: Two hundred and two consecutive patients scheduled to have spinal anaesthesia for various surgical procedures were enrolled prospectively after institutional approval. Following proper positioning for the neuraxial blockade, the ISG and SPW at the intended level were measured with calipers. The number of attempts, and redirections at the selected spinal level, and the number of levels required for successful needle placement were also recorded.

Results: Group-wise analysis of the data into patients requiring >1 attempt, >1 level and ≥3 redirections showed that the single independent predictor of a difficult neuraxial block was the ISG. Twenty-three percent of the patients required more than one attempt, with a mean gap of 6.35 (±1.2) mm, in contrast to 8.15 (±2.4) mm in those with a single attempt (P=0.000). In addition, 16% of the patients needed more than one level, with a mean gap of 6.03 (±2.01) mm in contrast to 8.07 (±2.37) mm for a single level (P=0.000).

Conclusions: The single independent predictor of ease or difficulty during spinal anaesthesia was the ISG (P=0.000).

Keywords: Difficulty; spinal anaesthesia; spinous process.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Photograph showing how the patient was positioned and held by an assistant prior to the measurement and until completion of the spinal anaesthetic administration
Figure 2
Figure 2
Photograph showing the interspinous gap marked with a skin marker after patient positioning
Figure 3
Figure 3
Chart comparing the interspinous gap measurements with the number of attempts and redirections

References

    1. Atallah MM, Demian AD, Shorrab AA. Development of a difficulty score for spinal anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2004;92:354–60.
    1. Chien I, Lu IC, Wang FY, Soo LY, Yu KL, Tang CS. Spinal process landmark as a predicting factor for difficult epidural block: A prospective study in Taiwanese patients. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2003;19:563–8.
    1. Sprung J, Bourke DL, Grass J, Hammel J, Mascha E, Thomas P, et al. Predicting the difficult neuraxial block: A prospective study. Anesth Analg. 1999;89:384–9.
    1. Tessler MJ, Kardash K, Wahba RM, Kleiman SJ, Trihas ST, Rossignol M. The performance of spinal anesthesia is marginally more difficult in the elderly. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999;24:126–30.
    1. de Filho GR, Gomes HP, da Fonseca MH, Hoffman JC, Pederneiras SG, Garcia JH. Predictors of successful neuraxial block: A prospective study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2002;19:447–51.
    1. Kim JH, Song SY, Kim BJ. Predicting the difficulty in performing a neuraxial blockade. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2011;61:377–81.
    1. Kopacz DJ, Neal JM, Pollock JE. The regional anesthesia “learning curve”. What is the minimum number of epidural and spinal blocks to reach consistency? Reg Anesth. 1996;21:182–90.
    1. Tarkkila P, Huhtala J, Salminen U. Difficulties in spinal needle use. Insertion characteristics and failure rates associated with 25-, 27- and 29-gauge Quincke-type spinal needles. Anaesthesia. 1994;49:723–5.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit