Suppr超能文献

通过隧道技术预防硬膜外导管移位和炎症:一项系统评价和荟萃分析

Prevention of Epidural Catheter Migration and Inflammation by Tunneling: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

van Kassel Merel N, Hermanides Jeroen, Lirk Philipp, Hollmann Markus W

机构信息

Departement of Anesthesiolgy, Amsterdam University Medical Center, 1100 DD Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 15;14(16):5788. doi: 10.3390/jcm14165788.

Abstract

/: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of tunneling as a fixation technique of epidural catheters on catheter migration and infection compared to conventional fixation techniques. : All studies comparing any epidural tunnel fixation technique with any conventional epidural fixation technique (any technique, e.g., adhesive tape) were included, with the exclusion of the obstetric population and the exclusion of caudal anesthesia. MEDLINE and Embase were searched on 18 April 2025 to identify these studies. To evaluate the risk of bias in the selected studies, the Risk of Bias assessment tool from the Cochrane Handbook was used. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined to describe the difference in migration and infection between the two groups. : Eleven studies, with a total number of 23,695 patients, were included in this systematic review. Pooled data of the nine studies reporting data on migration showed that tunneling reduced the incidence of inward migration (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.55; n = 613; < 0.0001; I2 = 0%) but not outward migration (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.25 to 1.43; n = 745; = 0.25; I2 = 77%). Pooled data from the nine studies on the incidence of infection revealed no statistically significant group difference. : Tunneling of the epidural catheter as a fixation technique reduces the risk of inward migration compared to conventional fixation methods. However, for outward migration, tunneling does not reduce the risk of infection. There is a large heterogeneity in fixation methods described in the literature. In summary, this first comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis corroborates only part of the benefits widely ascribed to epidural catheter tunneling.

摘要

目的

本系统评价和荟萃分析评估了与传统固定技术相比,隧道式固定作为硬膜外导管固定技术对导管移位和感染的疗效。

方法

纳入所有比较任何硬膜外隧道固定技术与任何传统硬膜外固定技术(任何技术,如胶带)的研究,排除产科人群和骶管麻醉。于2025年4月18日检索MEDLINE和Embase以识别这些研究。使用Cochrane手册中的偏倚风险评估工具来评估所选研究中的偏倚风险。确定具有95%置信区间(CI)的风险比(RR)以描述两组之间移位和感染的差异。

结果

本系统评价纳入了11项研究,共23695例患者。报告移位数据的9项研究的汇总数据显示,隧道式固定降低了向内移位的发生率(RR,0.33;95%CI,0.19至0.55;n = 613;P < 0.0001;I² = 0%),但未降低向外移位的发生率(RR,0.60;95%CI,0.25至1.43;n = 745;P = 0.25;I² = 77%)。9项关于感染发生率的研究的汇总数据显示两组之间无统计学显著差异。

结论

与传统固定方法相比,硬膜外导管的隧道式固定技术可降低向内移位的风险。然而,对于向外移位,隧道式固定并不能降低感染风险。文献中描述的固定方法存在很大异质性。总之,这项首次全面的系统评价和荟萃分析仅证实了广泛归因于硬膜外导管隧道式固定的部分益处。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/486d/12387545/cae2246bb9d6/jcm-14-05788-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验