A randomized comparison of loss of resistance versus loss of resistance plus electrical stimulation: effect on success of thoracic epidural placement

Sean Wayne Dobson, Robert Stephen Weller, Christopher Edwards, James David Turner, Jonathan Douglas Jaffe, Jon Wellington Reynolds, Daryl Steven Henshaw, Sean Wayne Dobson, Robert Stephen Weller, Christopher Edwards, James David Turner, Jonathan Douglas Jaffe, Jon Wellington Reynolds, Daryl Steven Henshaw

Abstract

Background: Loss of resistance (LOR) for epidural catheter placement has been utilized for almost a century. LOR is a subjective endpoint associated with a high failure rate. Nerve stimulation (NS) has been described as an objective method for confirming placement of an epidural catheter. We hypothesized that the addition of NS to LOR would improve the success of epidural catheter placement.

Methods: One-hundred patients were randomized to thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) utilizing LOR-alone or loss of resistance plus nerve stimulation (LOR + NS). The primary endpoint was rate of success, defined as loss of sensation following test dose. Secondary endpoints included performance time. An intention-to-treat analysis was planned, but a per-protocol analysis was performed to investigate the success rate when stimulation was achieved.

Results: In the intention-to-treat analysis there was no difference in success rates (90% vs 82% [LOR + NS vs LOR-alone]; P = 0.39). The procedural time increased in the LOR + NS group (33.9 ± 12.8 vs 24.0 ± 8.0 min; P < 0.001). The per-protocol analysis found a statistically higher success rate for the LOR + NS group compared to the LOR-alone group (98% vs. 82%; P = 0.017) when only patients in whom stimulation was achieved were included.

Conclusions: Addition of NS technique did not statistically improve the success rate for epidural placement when analyzed in an intention-to-treat format and was associated with a longer procedural time. In a per-protocol analysis a statistically higher success rate for patients in whom stimulation was obtained highlights the potential benefit of adding NS to LOR.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03087604 on 3/22/2017; Institutional Review Board Wake Forest School of Medicine IRB00039522, Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption: G160273.

Keywords: Acute pain management; Analgesia; Loss of resistance; Nerve stimulation; Regional anesthesia; Thoracic epidural.

Conflict of interest statement

No financial or non-financial competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consort diagram of the study

References

    1. Dogliotti AM. Anaesthesia—Narcosis, Local, Regional, Spinal. Chicago: S.B. Debour; 1939.
    1. Tran DQ, Van Zundert TC, Aliste J, Engsusophon P, Finlayson RJ. Primary failure of thoracic epidural analgesia in training centers: the invisible elephant? Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41:309–313. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000394.
    1. Hermanides J, Hollmann MW, Stevens MF, Lirk P. Failed epidural: causes and management. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109:144–154. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes214.
    1. Burstal R, Wegener F, Hayes C, Lantry G. Epidural analgesia: prospective audit of 1062 patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1998;26:165–172. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9802600206.
    1. Andersen G, Rasmussen H, Rosenstock C, Blemmer T, Engbaek J, Christensen M, et al. Postoperative pain control by epidural analgesia after transabdominal surgery Efficacy and problems encountered in daily routine. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2000;44:296–301. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2000.440313.x.
    1. McLeod G, Davies H, Munnoch N, Bannister J, MacRae W. Postoperative pain relief using thoracic epidural analgesia: outstanding success and disappointing failures. Anaesthesia. 2001;56:75–81. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2001.01763-7.x.
    1. Ready LB. Acute pain: lessons learned from 25,000 patients. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999;24:499–505.
    1. Arnuntasupakul V, Van Zundert TC, Vijitpavan A, Aliste J, Engsusophon P, Leurcharusmee P, et al. A randomized comparison between conventional and waveform-confirmed loss of resistance for thoracic epidural blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41:368–373. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000369.
    1. Tsui BC, Gupta S, Finucane B. Confirmation of epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation. Can J Anaesth. 1998;45:640–644. doi: 10.1007/BF03012093.
    1. Horlocker T, Vandermeulen E, Kopp S, et al. Regional anesthesia in the patient receiving antithrombotic or thrombolytic therapy. American Society of Regional Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Evidence-Based Guidelines (fourth addition) Rg Anesth Pain Med. 2018;43:263–309. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000763.
    1. Leurcharusmee P, Arnuntasupakul V, De La ChoraGarza D, Vijitpavan A, Ah-Kye S, Saelao A, et al. Reliability of waveform analysis as an adjunct to loss of resistance for thoracic epidural blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2015;40:694–7. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000313.
    1. Parra, et al. Fluoroscopic guidance increases the incidence of thoracic epidural catheter placement within the epidural space: a randomized controlled trial. Rg Anesth Pain Med. 2017;42(1):17–24.
    1. Rasoulian A, et al. Utility of prepuncture ultrasound for localization of the thoracic epidural space. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth. 2011;58:815–823. doi: 10.1007/s12630-011-9548-9.
    1. Salman, et al. Ultrasound imaging of the thoracic spine in paramedian sagittal plane. Rg Anesth Pain Med. 2011;36(6).
    1. Tsui BC, Gupta S, Finucane B. Determination of epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation in obstetric patients. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 1999;24:17–23. doi: 10.1097/00115550-199924031-00011.
    1. Tsui BC, Guenther C, Emery D, Finucane B. Determining epidural catheter location using nerve stimulation with radiological confirmation. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2000;25:306–309.
    1. Charghi R, Chan SY, Kardash KJ, Finlayson RJ, Tran DQ. Electrical stimulation of the epidural space using a catheter with a removable stylet. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2007;32:152–156. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2006.10.006.
    1. Tsui BCH, Finucane B. Epidural stimulator catheter. Techniques in Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2002;6:150–154. doi: 10.1053/trap.2002.123513.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться