Cargando…
Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space
BACKGROUND: Epidrum® is a recently developed, air operated, loss of resistance (LOR) device for identifying the epidural space. We investigated the usefulness of Epidrum® by comparing it with the conventional LOR technique for identifying the epidural space. METHODS: One hundred eight American Socie...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3337377/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22558497 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2012.62.4.322 |
_version_ | 1782231065211961344 |
---|---|
author | Kim, Seon Wook Kim, Young Mi Kim, Soo Hwan Chung, Mi Hwa Choi, Young Ryong Choi, Eun Mi |
author_facet | Kim, Seon Wook Kim, Young Mi Kim, Soo Hwan Chung, Mi Hwa Choi, Young Ryong Choi, Eun Mi |
author_sort | Kim, Seon Wook |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Epidrum® is a recently developed, air operated, loss of resistance (LOR) device for identifying the epidural space. We investigated the usefulness of Epidrum® by comparing it with the conventional LOR technique for identifying the epidural space. METHODS: One hundred eight American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II patients between the ages of 17 and 68 years old and who were scheduled for elective surgery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized into two groups: one group received epidural anesthesia by the conventional LOR technique (C group) and the second group received epidural anesthesia using Epidrum® (ED group). While performing epidural anesthesia, the values of variables were recorded, including the number of failures, more than 2 attempts, the incidence of dural puncture, the time needed to locate the epidural space, the distance from the skin to the epidural space and ease of performance, and the satisfaction scores. RESULTS: The ED group showed a lower failure rate, fewer cases of more than 2 attempts, a lesser time to identify the epidural space, and better ease and satisfaction scores of procedure than the C group, with statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Using Epidrum® compared to the conventional LOR technique is an easy, rapid, and reliable method for identifying the epidural space. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3337377 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-33373772012-05-03 Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space Kim, Seon Wook Kim, Young Mi Kim, Soo Hwan Chung, Mi Hwa Choi, Young Ryong Choi, Eun Mi Korean J Anesthesiol Clinical Research Article BACKGROUND: Epidrum® is a recently developed, air operated, loss of resistance (LOR) device for identifying the epidural space. We investigated the usefulness of Epidrum® by comparing it with the conventional LOR technique for identifying the epidural space. METHODS: One hundred eight American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I or II patients between the ages of 17 and 68 years old and who were scheduled for elective surgery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized into two groups: one group received epidural anesthesia by the conventional LOR technique (C group) and the second group received epidural anesthesia using Epidrum® (ED group). While performing epidural anesthesia, the values of variables were recorded, including the number of failures, more than 2 attempts, the incidence of dural puncture, the time needed to locate the epidural space, the distance from the skin to the epidural space and ease of performance, and the satisfaction scores. RESULTS: The ED group showed a lower failure rate, fewer cases of more than 2 attempts, a lesser time to identify the epidural space, and better ease and satisfaction scores of procedure than the C group, with statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Using Epidrum® compared to the conventional LOR technique is an easy, rapid, and reliable method for identifying the epidural space. The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2012-04 2012-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC3337377/ /pubmed/22558497 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2012.62.4.322 Text en Copyright © the Korean Society of Anesthesiologists, 2012 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Research Article Kim, Seon Wook Kim, Young Mi Kim, Soo Hwan Chung, Mi Hwa Choi, Young Ryong Choi, Eun Mi Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
title | Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
title_full | Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
title_fullStr | Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
title_short | Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
title_sort | comparison of loss of resistance technique between epidrum® and conventional method for identifying the epidural space |
topic | Clinical Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3337377/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22558497 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2012.62.4.322 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kimseonwook comparisonoflossofresistancetechniquebetweenepidrumandconventionalmethodforidentifyingtheepiduralspace AT kimyoungmi comparisonoflossofresistancetechniquebetweenepidrumandconventionalmethodforidentifyingtheepiduralspace AT kimsoohwan comparisonoflossofresistancetechniquebetweenepidrumandconventionalmethodforidentifyingtheepiduralspace AT chungmihwa comparisonoflossofresistancetechniquebetweenepidrumandconventionalmethodforidentifyingtheepiduralspace AT choiyoungryong comparisonoflossofresistancetechniquebetweenepidrumandconventionalmethodforidentifyingtheepiduralspace AT choieunmi comparisonoflossofresistancetechniquebetweenepidrumandconventionalmethodforidentifyingtheepiduralspace |