- ICH GCP
- Amerikanska kliniska prövningsregistret
- Klinisk prövning NCT07669441
Early Labor Pre-Marking for Epidural Analgesia: Ultrasound vs Manual Palpation
Early Preprocedural Ultrasound Versus Landmark Palpation for Site Identification in Labour Epidural Analgesia: A Randomised Controlled Trial
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if finding and marking the best spot on the back early in labor helps doctors perform epidural pain relief more successfully in pregnant women. Usually, epidural pain relief is requested when labor pain is already severe, which makes it hard for women to hold still. This makes it difficult to find the right needle spot, leading to more needle attempts
The main questions this study aims to answer are:
- Does using ultrasound to mark the back early in labor (before severe pain starts) help the doctor place the needle correctly on first try without adjusting it?
- Does this early marking method lower the number of needle attempts and the time it takes to finish the procedure? Researchers will compare marking the back using an ultrasound machine to the standard method of feeling the spine with hands. Both methods will be done early in the waiting room to avoid the challenges caused by severe pain. Importantly, neither the pregnant women nor the doctors performing the epidural will know which marking method was used. This design prevents personal beliefs or expectations from affecting the procedure, making the study results objective and trustworthy.
Participants will, if consented and participated in the study:
- Have their lower back examined and marked by a doctor early in labor using either an ultrasound machine or the doctor's hands.
- Receive an epidural pain relief in the delivery room when they request it. This will be done by a different doctor who does not know how the back was marked.
- Answer short questions about their pain level and how happy they are with the procedure.
Studieöversikt
Status
Betingelser
Intervention / Behandling
Detaljerad beskrivning
Background: Epidural analgesia is a widely accepted and highly effective method for managing labor pain. Traditionally, anesthesiologists identify the epidural insertion site by manually palpating anatomical landmarks. However, this conventional approach can be challenging and imprecise for many parturients. Factors such as soft tissue edema, exaggerated lumbar curvature during pregnancy, and rising obesity rates can obscure bony landmarks. Furthermore, frequent and painful uterine contractions during active labor often hinder the patient from maintaining the ideal flexed posture required for the procedure. These clinical challenges can result in multiple needle insertions, frequent redirection, prolonged procedure times, and an increased risk of patient discomfort or procedural complications.
Preprocedural spinal ultrasound has emerged as a valuable tool to address these limitations. By visualizing the anatomy in advance, clinicians can accurately identify the appropriate intervertebral space, locate the mid line, determine the optimal needle insertion point and angle, and measure the precise distance from the skin to the epidural space. While prior research indicates that ultrasound guidance reduces technical difficulty, minimizes needle passes, and enhances first-attempt success rates, many of these studies lacked rigorous blinding or involved the same clinician performing both the ultrasound and the epidural placement, introducing potential observer bias. Additionally, in Vietnam, there is a lack of high-quality interventional research comparing ultrasound-assisted and traditional palpation techniques using standardized outcome measures.
Therefore, this randomized clinical trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-assisted marking versus conventional palpation for labor epidural analgesia. We hypothesize that preprocedural spinal ultrasound guidance significantly improves the first-pass success rate without requiring needle redirection when compared to the traditional technique. The results of this study aim to optimize clinical practice by promoting routine use of preprocedural ultrasound to enhance safety, efficacy and the overall childbirth experience. A key feature of this study is performing ultrasound assessment early in labor, prior to the onset of severe pain or a request for analgesia. This timing allows the parturient to remain comfortable, alert, and highly cooperative, ensuring precise marking. Once active labor necessitates epidural analgesia, the attending physician anesthesiologist can rely on the pre-marked site, streamlining the procedure and reducing patient wait times and distress Study Objectives: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of neuraxial ultrasound compared with the conventional anatomical landmark palpation technique for epidural analgesia during labor.
- Primary Objective: To compare the success rate of the first needle pass without any needle redirection between the ultrasound-assisted group and the landmark-based group.
- Secondary Objectives: To compare other procedural characteristics, including the overall success rate of the first skin puncture, the total number of skin punctures, the number of needle redirection, the total procedure time, and the incidence of procedural complications (e.g., paresthesia, vascular puncture, dural puncture).
Study Design and Methodology: This is a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial conducted at the Obstetrics Department of the University Medical Center Ho Chi Minh City. Parturients are randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio using block randomization) to either the Ultrasound Group or the Landmark Group.
4. Detailed Intervention Workflow: The study protocol is distinctly divided into two phases managed by different personnel to ensure strict blinding:
Phase 1 - Preprocedural Assessment and Marking (Labor Waiting Room): Parturients are positioned on the lateral decubitus position (knees flexed to the abdomen, neck flexed) to maximize the opening of the intervertebral spaces. The first investigator (an anesthesiologist experienced in neuraxial ultrasound) opens the sealed randomization envelope and performs the assessment:
- For the Ultrasound Group: The investigator uses an ultrasound machine with a 2-5 MHz curved transducer. The L3-L4 intervertebral space is identified via the paramedian sagittal oblique view (counting upwards from the sacrum). The probe is then rotated 90 degrees to the transverse interspinous view to identify the exact midline and the optimal posterior complex. The optimal needle entry point is marked on the skin using a surgical marker, and the skin-to-epidural depth is measured via the ultrasound image.
- For the Landmark Group: The investigator manually palpates the anatomical landmarks to identify the L3-L4 intervertebral space and marks the midline insertion site on the skin with a surgical marker. Subsequently, the investigator uses ultrasound strictly to measure the skin-to-epidural depth at this pre-marked site for data collection purposes only, without altering the physical mark.
Phase 2: Epidural Placement (Delivery Room) Once marked, the parturient is transferred to the delivery room for the epidural procedure.
- A second anesthesiologist (the proceduralist), completely blinded to the group allocation, performs the epidural placement.
- The proceduralist is required to insert the Tuohy needle exactly at the pre-marked site on the skin. To maximize patient safety, the proceduralist is informed of the ultrasound-measured skin-to-dura depth before initiating the puncture.
- Procedural Rules: If the epidural space cannot be accessed, the proceduralist is allowed a maximum of 5 needle redirection (defined as changing the needle trajectory without completely withdrawing the needle tip from the skin). If the space is still not found after 5 redirection, the physician must completely withdraw the Tuohy needle from the skin, manually re-identify the anatomical landmarks, and perform a second skin puncture at a newly determined site.
- Failure Criteria: The procedure is classified as a technical failure if the proceduralist cannot locate the epidural space after 3 complete skin punctures at different locations.
Data Collection: All procedural data, timings, and clinical outcomes are meticulously recorded by an independent anesthetic nurse present in the delivery room, who is also completely blinded to the randomization.
Studietyp
Inskrivning (Faktisk)
Fas
- Inte tillämpbar
Kontakter och platser
Studieorter
-
-
Ho Chi Minh
-
Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 700000
- University Medical Center Ho Chi Minh City
-
-
Deltagandekriterier
Urvalskriterier
Åldrar som är berättigade till studier
- Vuxen
- Äldre vuxen
Tar emot friska volontärer
Beskrivning
Inclusion Criteria:
- Parturients aged 18 years and older, with gestational age at 37 weeks or older.
- Actively requesting epidural analgesia for labor pain management without any contraindication to the procedure.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Parturients with spinal abnormalities or a history of spinal surgery.
- Inability to visualize epidural landmarks under ultrasound imaging.
- Parturients experiencing severe pain requiring immediate, emergent labor analgesia.
Studieplan
Hur är studien utformad?
Designdetaljer
- Primärt syfte: Behandling
- Tilldelning: Randomiserad
- Interventionsmodell: Parallellt uppdrag
- Maskning: Trippel
Vapen och interventioner
Deltagargrupp / Arm |
Intervention / Behandling |
|---|---|
|
Aktiv komparator: Landmark Group
Participants in this arm will undergo manual palpation of surface bony landmarks of L3-L4 interspace while on the left lateral decubitus position.
This conventional approach determines the needle insertion point without relying on ultrasound guidance.
|
The anesthesiologist manually palpates anatomical landmarks to identify L3-L4 interspace and marks the midline insertion site.
An ultrasound probe is then placed over this marked site only to measure skin-to-epidural depth for data collection purposes.
These measurements are recorded but are not used to adjust or alter the marked insertion point.
|
|
Experimentell: Ultrasound group
Participants in this arm will undergo preprocedural spinal ultrasound while on the left lateral decubitus position.
The ultrasound is used to identify the L3-L4 interspace, the midline, and the optimal needle insertion point.
|
A curvilinear probe is applied to the lower back in a transverse orientation.
The vertebral midline is marked after identifying a symmetrical image in the transverse spinous process view.
The probe is then oriented to obtain a paramedian sagittal laminar view.
After locating the sacrum and lumbosacral junction, the probe is moved cephalad to identify and mark the L3 and L4 laminae.
The probe is rotated back to a transverse view to systematically assess the lumbar interlaminar spaces, using the posterior complex (ligamentum flavum, epidural space, and posterior dura) and the anterior complex (anterior dura, posterior longitudinal ligament, and posterior vertebral body) as key landmarks.
Markings are done with pen at four midpoints of the probe's edges in the L3-L4 space with the largest acoustic window.
The intersection of horizontal and vertical lines drawn from these marks designates the needle insertion point.
|
Vad mäter studien?
Primära resultatmått
Resultatmått |
Åtgärdsbeskrivning |
Tidsram |
|---|---|---|
|
First-pass success
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
First-pass success is defined as the successful identification of the epidural space during the initial forward advancement of the needle, without any needle redirection or withdrawal
|
Periprocedural
|
Sekundära resultatmått
Resultatmått |
Åtgärdsbeskrivning |
Tidsram |
|---|---|---|
|
Dural puncture
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
Presence of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in the Tuohy needle or upon catheter aspiration
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Adequate analgesia
Tidsram: 1 hour post-procedure
|
Yes/No variable.
VAS less than 3 at one hour post procedurally.
|
1 hour post-procedure
|
|
First-attempt success
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
First-attempt success is defined as the successful identification of the epidural space achieved with only a single skin puncture
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Number of needle redirections
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
A needle redirection is defined as any partial withdrawal of the needle followed by a change in its advancement angle without the needle tip exiting the skin surface.
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Number of needle attempts
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
A needle attempt is defined as a new skin puncture after the needle has been completely withdrawn.
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Procedure time
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Measured in seconds.
Time from the moment the proceduralist inserts the Touhy needle at the marked position to final catheter fixation.
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Paresthesia
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
Paresthesia is defined as any abnormal sensation (electric shock-like, tingling, or numbness) reported by the patient during needle insertion or catheter insertion.
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Vascular puncture
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
Vascular puncture is defined as the presence of blood in the catheter or flashback in the needle.
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Maternal satisfaction
Tidsram: 2 hours postpartum
|
Patient satisfaction of the procedure is measured on a 0-10 Visual Analog Scale (VAS), where 0 represented 'completely dissatisfied' and 10 represented 'completely satisfied'.
|
2 hours postpartum
|
|
Procedure failure
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
Procedure failure is defined as inability to identify the epidural space after attempting at three different skin puncture sites
|
Periprocedural
|
|
Change of intervertebral space
Tidsram: Periprocedural
|
Yes/No variable.
A change of intervertebral space is defined as the complete withdrawal of the needle from the initially selected spinal level and re-insertion at a different level.
|
Periprocedural
|
Samarbetspartners och utredare
Utredare
- Huvudutredare: An Vu Nguyen, MD, MSc, University Medical Center Ho Chi Minh City
Publikationer och användbara länkar
Allmänna publikationer
- Grau T, Leipold RW, Conradi R, Martin E, Motsch J. Ultrasound imaging facilitates localization of the epidural space during combined spinal and epidural anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2001 Jan-Feb;26(1):64-7. doi: 10.1053/rapm.2001.19633. No abstract available.
- Tawfik MM, Atallah MM, Elkharboutly WS, Allakkany NS, Abdelkhalek M. Does Preprocedural Ultrasound Increase the First-Pass Success Rate of Epidural Catheterization Before Cesarean Delivery? A Randomized Controlled Trial. Anesth Analg. 2017 Mar;124(3):851-856. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001325.
- Chin A, Crooke B, Heywood L, Brijball R, Pelecanos AM, Abeypala W. A randomised controlled trial comparing needle movements during combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia with and without ultrasound assistance. Anaesthesia. 2018 Apr;73(4):466-473. doi: 10.1111/anae.14206. Epub 2018 Jan 10.
- Arzola C, Mikhael R, Margarido C, Carvalho JC. Spinal ultrasound versus palpation for epidural catheter insertion in labour: A randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2015 Jul;32(7):499-505. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000119.
- Grau T, Leipold RW, Conradi R, Martin E, Motsch J. Efficacy of ultrasound imaging in obstetric epidural anesthesia. J Clin Anesth. 2002 May;14(3):169-75. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(01)00378-6.
- 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.
- Tubinis MD, Lester SA, Schlitz CN, Morgan CJ, Sakawi Y, Powell MF. Utility of ultrasonography in identification of midline and epidural placement in severely obese parturients. Minerva Anestesiol. 2019 Oct;85(10):1089-1096. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.19.13617-6. Epub 2019 Jun 17.
- Ni X, Li MZ, Zhou SQ, Xu ZD, Zhang YQ, Yu YB, Su J, Zhang LM, Liu ZQ. Accuro ultrasound-based system with computer-aided image interpretation compared to traditional palpation technique for neuraxial anesthesia placement in obese parturients undergoing cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. J Anesth. 2021 Aug;35(4):475-482. doi: 10.1007/s00540-021-02922-y. Epub 2021 May 29.
- de Carvalho CC, Porto Genuino W, Vieira Morais MC, de Paiva Oliveira H, Rodrigues AI, El-Boghdadly K. Efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided versus landmark-guided neuraxial puncture: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2025 Sep 4;50(9):737-746. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2024-105547.
- Perna P, Gioia A, Ragazzi R, Volta CA, Innamorato M. Can pre-procedure neuroaxial ultrasound improve the identification of the potential epidural space when compared with anatomical landmarks? A prospective randomized study. Minerva Anestesiol. 2017 Jan;83(1):41-49. doi: 10.23736/S0375-9393.16.11399-9. Epub 2016 Oct 4.
- Ekinci M, Alici HA, Ahiskalioglu A, Ince I, Aksoy M, Celik EC, Dostbil A, Celik M, Baysal PK, Golboyu BE, Yeksan AN. The use of ultrasound in planned cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia for patients having nonprominent anatomic landmarks. J Clin Anesth. 2017 Feb;37:82-85. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2016.10.014. Epub 2017 Jan 4.
- Bae J, Kim Y, Yoo S, Kim JT, Park SK. Handheld ultrasound-assisted versus palpation-guided combined spinal-epidural for labor analgesia: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2023 Dec 27;13(1):23009. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-50407-7.
- Young B, Onwochei D, Desai N. Conventional landmark palpation vs. preprocedural ultrasound for neuraxial analgesia and anaesthesia in obstetrics - a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analyses. Anaesthesia. 2021 Jun;76(6):818-831. doi: 10.1111/anae.15255. Epub 2020 Sep 27.
Användbara länkar
Studieavstämningsdatum
Studera stora datum
Studiestart (Faktisk)
Primärt slutförande (Faktisk)
Avslutad studie (Faktisk)
Studieregistreringsdatum
Först inskickad
Först inskickad som uppfyllde QC-kriterierna
Första postat (Faktisk)
Uppdateringar av studier
Senaste uppdatering publicerad (Faktisk)
Senaste inskickade uppdateringen som uppfyllde QC-kriterierna
Senast verifierad
Mer information
Termer relaterade till denna studie
Nyckelord
Ytterligare relevanta MeSH-villkor
Andra studie-ID-nummer
- 104/GCN-HDDD
Plan för individuella deltagardata (IPD)
Planerar du att dela individuella deltagardata (IPD)?
IPD-planbeskrivning
Tidsram för IPD-delning
Kriterier för IPD Sharing Access
IPD-delning som stöder informationstyp
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
- SAV
- ANALYTIC_CODE
Läkemedels- och apparatinformation, studiedokument
Studerar en amerikansk FDA-reglerad läkemedelsprodukt
Studerar en amerikansk FDA-reglerad produktprodukt
Denna information hämtades direkt från webbplatsen clinicaltrials.gov utan några ändringar. Om du har några önskemål om att ändra, ta bort eller uppdatera dina studieuppgifter, vänligen kontakta register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en ändring har implementerats på clinicaltrials.gov, kommer denna att uppdateras automatiskt även på vår webbplats .