Efficacy of electrical stimulation on epidural anesthesia for cesarean section: a randomized controlled trial

Young Sung Kim, Hyo Sung Kim, Hyerim Jeong, Chung Hun Lee, Mi Kyoung Lee, Sang Sik Choi, Young Sung Kim, Hyo Sung Kim, Hyerim Jeong, Chung Hun Lee, Mi Kyoung Lee, Sang Sik Choi

Abstract

Background: Loss of resistance (LOR) technique is a widely used method to identify the epidural space. However, cases of inadequate epidural anesthesia in cesarean section were frequently reported. Also, the success rate of epidural anesthesia with LOR technique varied depending on the proficiency of the practitioner. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of electrical stimulation to identify epidural spaces in cesarean section for novices or clinicians with recent gap in experience.

Methods: Pregnant women scheduled for elective cesarean section were randomly allocated to two groups. Groups were classified based on the methods used for identifying the epidural space: the LOR group (group L) and the LOR with epidural electrical stimulation group (group E). Clinicians with less than 10 epidural cesarean section experiences in the recent year performed epidural anesthesia for cesarean section. In the group E, a RegionalStim® conductive catheter was inserted through the Tuohy needle, and the guidewire passing through the catheter was connected to a peripheral nerve stimulator. The intensity of the stimulation was gradually increased from 0.25 mA to 1.5 mA until paresthesia was elicited and radiated. We assessed the success of epidural anesthesia (complete success, partial success or failure). Other clinical parameters including maternal satisfaction, time required for epidural anesthesia, neonatal Apgar scores, pain scores and adverse events were compared between the two groups.

Results: Except for 6 patients who withdrew consent, 54 patients were enrolled in this study (28 for the group L and 26 for the group E). The demographic data showed no difference between the two groups. There was no adverse event resulted from electrical stimulation. The group E showed higher rate of complete success, sensitivity in finding epidural space and maternal satisfaction compared to the group L (21/26 vs. 15/28, p = 0.034, 0.96 vs. 0.68, p = 0.012 and 4.04 vs. 3.39, p = 0.02, respectively). The other clinical parameters showed no differences between the two groups.

Conclusion: In addition to the conventional LOR technique, identifying epidural spaces using electrical stimulation led to better outcomes without additional risks for novices as well as clinicians with recent gap in experience.

Trial registration: This study was retrospectively registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03443466) on February 23, 2018.

Keywords: Cesarean section; Electrical stimulation; Epidural anesthesia.

Conflict of interest statement

The corresponding author, Sang Sik Choi, is the one of developers for RegionalStim® epidural catheter. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT flow diagram. Group L used a loss of resistance technique in the epidural cesarean section while group E used electrical epidural stimulation combined with a loss of resistance technique

References

    1. Chau A, Tsen LC. Update on modalities and techniques for labor epidural analgesia and anesthesia. Adv Anesth. 2018;36(1):139–162. doi: 10.1016/j.aan.2018.07.006.
    1. Sharma RM, Setlur R, Bhargava AK, Vardhan S. Walking epidural : an effective method of labour pain relief. Med J Armed Forces India. 2007;63(1):44–46. doi: 10.1016/S0377-1237(07)80107-9.
    1. Maxwell BG, El-Sayed YY, Riley ET, Carvalho B. Peripartum outcomes and anaesthetic management of parturients with moderate to complex congenital heart disease or pulmonary hypertension. Anaesthesia. 2013;68(1):52–59. doi: 10.1111/anae.12058.
    1. Kinsella SM. A prospective audit of regional anaesthesia failure in 5080 caesarean sections. Anaesthesia. 2008;63(8):822–832. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05499.x.
    1. Orbach-Zinger S, Friedman L, Avramovich A, Ilgiaeva N, Orvieto R, Sulkes J, Eidelman LA. Risk factors for failure to extend labor epidural analgesia to epidural anesthesia for cesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006;50(8):1014–1018. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01095.x.
    1. Bauer ME, Kountanis JA, Tsen LC, Greenfield ML, Mhyre JM. Risk factors for failed conversion of labor epidural analgesia to cesarean delivery anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational trials. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2012;21(4):294–309. doi: 10.1016/j.ijoa.2012.05.007.
    1. Hermanides J, Hollmann MW, Stevens MF, Lirk P. Failed epidural: causes and management. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109(2):144–154. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes214.
    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(3):182–190.
    1. Lee CH, Choi SS, Lee MK, Kim JE, Chung DI, Lee M. Electric stimulation-guided epidural analgesia for vaginal delivery: a randomized prospective study. PLoS One. 2019;14(1):e0209967. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209967.
    1. Todorov L, VadeBoncouer T. Etiology and use of the "hanging drop" technique: a review. Pain Res Treat. 2014;2014:146750.
    1. Lechner TJM, van Wijk MGF, Jongenelis AAJ, Rybak M, van Niekerk J, Langenberg CJM. The use of a sound-enabled device to measure pressure during insertion of an epidural catheter in women in labour. Anaesthesia. 2011;66(7):568–573. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06696.x.
    1. Lee A, Loughrey JPR. The role of ultrasonography in obstetric anesthesia. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2017;31(1):81–90. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2016.12.001.
    1. Al-Aamri I, Derzi SH, Moore A, Elgueta MF, Moustafa M, Schricker T, Tran DQ. Reliability of pressure waveform analysis to determine correct epidural needle placement in labouring women. Anaesthesia. 2017;72(7):840–844. doi: 10.1111/anae.13872.
    1. Tsui BCH, Gupta S, Finucane B. Confirmation of epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation. Can J Anaesth. 1998;45(7):640–644. doi: 10.1007/BF03012093.
    1. Goobie SM, Montgomery CJ, Basu R, McFadzean J, O'Connor GJ, Poskitt K, Tsui BCH. Confirmation of direct epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation in pediatric anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2003;97(4):984–988. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000080609.05942.38.
    1. Jeong JS, Shim JC, Shim JH, Kim DW, Kang MS. Minimum current requirement for confirming the localization of an epiradicular catheter placement. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2012;63(3):238–244. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2012.63.3.238.
    1. Sutherland MA, Viscomi CM, Dominick TS, Anderson EL. Minimum current requirements for epidural stimulation test confirmation of epidural and intrathecal catheter placement. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009;34(6):575–577. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181bfbe1e.
    1. Tsui BC, Gupta S, Finucane B. Determination of epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation in obstetric patients. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999;24(1):17–23.
    1. Charghi R, Chan SY, Kardash KJ, Finlayson RJ, Tran DQH. Electrical stimulation of the epidural space using a catheter with a removable stylet. Region Anesth Pain M. 2007;32(2):152–156. doi: 10.1097/00115550-200703000-00010.
    1. Shibli KU, Russell IF. A survey of anaesthetic techniques used for caesarean section in the UK in 1997. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2000;9(3):160–167. doi: 10.1054/ijoa.1999.0382.
    1. Riley ET, Papasin J. Epidural catheter function during labor predicts anesthetic efficacy for subsequent cesarean delivery. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2002;11(2):81–84. doi: 10.1054/ijoa.2001.0927.
    1. Goring-Morris J, Russell IF. A randomised comparison of 0.5% bupivacaine with a lidocaine/epinephrine/fentanyl mixture for epidural top-up for emergency caesarean section after "low dose" epidural for labour. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2006;15(2):109–114. doi: 10.1016/j.ijoa.2005.11.005.
    1. Kim SH, Kim DY, Han JI, Baik HJ, Park HS, Lee GY, Kim JH. Vertebral level of Tuffier's line measured by ultrasonography in parturients in the lateral decubitus position. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2014;67(3):181–185. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2014.67.3.181.
    1. Massoth C, Wenk M. Epidural test dose in obstetric patients: should we still use it? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2019;32(3):263–267. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000721.
    1. Norris MC, Fogel ST, Dalman H, Borrenpohl S, Hoppe W, Riley A. Labor epidural analgesia without an intravascular "test dose". Anesthesiology. 1998;88(6):1495–1501. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199806000-00012.
    1. Hillyard SG, Bate TE, Corcoran TB, Paech MJ, O'Sullivan G. Extending epidural analgesia for emergency caesarean section: a meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2011;107(5):668–678. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer300.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner