Bolden Norman, Gebre Ermias
From the *Department of Anesthesiology, MetroHealth Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH; and †Department of Anesthesiology, Kingman Regional Medical Center, Kingman, AZ.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Mar-Apr;41(2):169-74. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000339.
The use of spinal catheters for extended periods after accidental dural puncture (ADP) and administration of intrathecal saline via spinal catheters have been advocated to decrease the incidence of postdural puncture headache and the subsequent need for epidural blood patch (EBP), with mixed results observed.
We reviewed the medical records of 218 patients with ADP who either had the epidural resited or had a spinal catheter (with or without the administration of intrathecal saline). We compared the incidence of headache and the need for blood patch between these groups. We also assessed complications when a standard lidocaine epidural test dose was administered intrathecally and compared this with complications when a solution normally used for labor combined spinal epidurals was administered.
There was no difference in the incidence of postdural puncture headache between the resited epidural group and the spinal catheter group, 68.0% versus 55.9% (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.0-2.9; P = 0.07). Resiting the epidural catheter was associated with a significant increase in the number of EBPs when compared with using a spinal catheter, 52.0% versus 20.3% (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.4-7.6; P < 0.001) and when compared with spinal catheters with intrathecal saline, 52.0% versus 8.1% (OR, 12.3; 95% CI, 4.3-35.4; P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the number of blood patches between normal body mass index patients and morbidly obese patients, 55.2% versus 25.0% (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.2-11.2; P = 0.02). Complications (hypotension prompting pressors, high spinal, and emergency cesarean delivery because of nonreassuring fetal status) occurred more frequently when a lidocaine test dose was immediately administered after ADP versus administering a labor combined spinal epidural solution.
Insertion of spinal catheters after ADP and administration of intrathecal normal saline via spinal catheters reduce the need for EBP compared with resiting the epidural. Administration of the standard epidural test dose intrathecally is associated with frequent and significant complications.
有人主张在意外硬膜穿破(ADP)后长时间使用脊髓导管,并通过脊髓导管注入鞘内生理盐水,以降低硬膜穿破后头痛的发生率以及后续进行硬膜外血贴(EBP)的必要性,但观察到的结果不一。
我们回顾了218例ADP患者的病历,这些患者要么重新放置了硬膜外导管,要么留置了脊髓导管(无论是否注入鞘内生理盐水)。我们比较了这些组之间头痛的发生率和血贴的必要性。我们还评估了鞘内注射标准利多卡因硬膜外试验剂量时的并发症,并将其与注射通常用于分娩联合脊髓硬膜外麻醉的溶液时的并发症进行比较。
重新放置硬膜外导管组和脊髓导管组之间硬膜穿破后头痛的发生率没有差异,分别为68.0%和55.9%(优势比[OR],1.7;95%置信区间[95%CI],1.0 - 2.9;P = 0.07)。与使用脊髓导管相比,重新放置硬膜外导管与EBP的数量显著增加相关,分别为52.0%和20.3%(OR,4.2;95%CI,2.4 - 7.6;P < 0.001),与注入鞘内生理盐水的脊髓导管相比,分别为52.0%和8.1%(OR,12.3;95%CI,4.3 - 35.4;P < 0.001)。正常体重指数患者和病态肥胖患者之间血贴的数量有显著差异,分别为55.2%和25.0%(OR,3.7;95%CI,1.2 - 11.2;P = 0.02)。与注射分娩联合脊髓硬膜外麻醉溶液相比,ADP后立即注射利多卡因试验剂量时并发症(因低血压需使用升压药、高位脊髓阻滞以及因胎儿状况不佳而行急诊剖宫产)更频繁发生。
与重新放置硬膜外导管相比,ADP后插入脊髓导管并通过脊髓导管注入鞘内生理盐水可减少EBP的必要性。鞘内注射标准硬膜外试验剂量会伴有频繁且严重的并发症。