Cargando…

Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: The optimal puncture technique for neuraxial anaesthesia in different populations is unclear. We sought to obtain data from randomised controlled trials comparing the impact of ultrasound-guided technology and traditional positioning technology on the success rate of neuraxial anaesthesi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yinzhou, Peng, Mingling, Wei, Junying, Huang, Jieling, Ma, WuHua, Li, Yuhui
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10626869/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37918920
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071253
_version_ 1785131431163330560
author Zhang, Yinzhou
Peng, Mingling
Wei, Junying
Huang, Jieling
Ma, WuHua
Li, Yuhui
author_facet Zhang, Yinzhou
Peng, Mingling
Wei, Junying
Huang, Jieling
Ma, WuHua
Li, Yuhui
author_sort Zhang, Yinzhou
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The optimal puncture technique for neuraxial anaesthesia in different populations is unclear. We sought to obtain data from randomised controlled trials comparing the impact of ultrasound-guided technology and traditional positioning technology on the success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis using study populations, interventions, intervention comparisons, outcome measures and study types. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science were searched until 31 September 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing three types of neuraxial anaesthesia: ultrasound-assisted, ultrasound real-time guidance and conventional positioning to describe which neuraxial anaesthesia modality is best for patients and to recommend the appropriate one for different populations. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Five independent reviewers retrieved, screened and edited included studies using standardised methods. Assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA V.15 statistical software. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies containing three different interventions were included. The SUCRA values of first-pass success rates for the three neuraxial anaesthesia methods were real-time guidance (82.8%), ultrasound-assisted (67.1%) and traditional positioning (0.1%). Both ultrasound techniques improved first-pass success rates compared with traditional localization, but there was no significant difference between the two. Subgroup analysis showed that the use of real-time ultrasound guidance for neuraxial anaesthesia in pregnant and patients with obesity improved first-pass success rates. Ultrasound-assisted technology can improve first-attempt success rates in older patients with abnormal lumbar spine anatomy. CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional positioning, ultrasound guidance technology can improve the first-pass success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia, but there is no significant difference between ultrasound-assisted and real-time guidance technology. The results of subgroup analysis tell us that the most suitable neuraxial anaesthesia method is different for different groups of people. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO number: CRD42022376041.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10626869
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106268692023-11-07 Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis Zhang, Yinzhou Peng, Mingling Wei, Junying Huang, Jieling Ma, WuHua Li, Yuhui BMJ Open Anaesthesia OBJECTIVES: The optimal puncture technique for neuraxial anaesthesia in different populations is unclear. We sought to obtain data from randomised controlled trials comparing the impact of ultrasound-guided technology and traditional positioning technology on the success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis using study populations, interventions, intervention comparisons, outcome measures and study types. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science were searched until 31 September 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing three types of neuraxial anaesthesia: ultrasound-assisted, ultrasound real-time guidance and conventional positioning to describe which neuraxial anaesthesia modality is best for patients and to recommend the appropriate one for different populations. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Five independent reviewers retrieved, screened and edited included studies using standardised methods. Assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA V.15 statistical software. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies containing three different interventions were included. The SUCRA values of first-pass success rates for the three neuraxial anaesthesia methods were real-time guidance (82.8%), ultrasound-assisted (67.1%) and traditional positioning (0.1%). Both ultrasound techniques improved first-pass success rates compared with traditional localization, but there was no significant difference between the two. Subgroup analysis showed that the use of real-time ultrasound guidance for neuraxial anaesthesia in pregnant and patients with obesity improved first-pass success rates. Ultrasound-assisted technology can improve first-attempt success rates in older patients with abnormal lumbar spine anatomy. CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional positioning, ultrasound guidance technology can improve the first-pass success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia, but there is no significant difference between ultrasound-assisted and real-time guidance technology. The results of subgroup analysis tell us that the most suitable neuraxial anaesthesia method is different for different groups of people. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO number: CRD42022376041. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10626869/ /pubmed/37918920 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071253 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Anaesthesia
Zhang, Yinzhou
Peng, Mingling
Wei, Junying
Huang, Jieling
Ma, WuHua
Li, Yuhui
Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
title Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_short Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_sort comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
topic Anaesthesia
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10626869/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37918920
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071253
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyinzhou comparisonofultrasoundguidedandtraditionallocalisationinintraspinalanesthesiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT pengmingling comparisonofultrasoundguidedandtraditionallocalisationinintraspinalanesthesiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT weijunying comparisonofultrasoundguidedandtraditionallocalisationinintraspinalanesthesiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT huangjieling comparisonofultrasoundguidedandtraditionallocalisationinintraspinalanesthesiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT mawuhua comparisonofultrasoundguidedandtraditionallocalisationinintraspinalanesthesiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT liyuhui comparisonofultrasoundguidedandtraditionallocalisationinintraspinalanesthesiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis