Ultrasound-Guided Needle Technique Accuracy: Prospective Comparison of Passive Magnetic Tracking Versus Unassisted Echogenic Needle Localization

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia facilitates an approach to sensitive targets such as nerve clusters without contact or inadvertent puncture. We compared accuracy of needle placement with a novel passive magnetic ultrasound needle guidance technology (NGT) versus conventional ultrasound (CU) with echogenic needles. METHODS: Sixteen anesthesiologists and 19 residents performed a series of 16 needle insertion tasks each, 8 using NGT (n = 280) and 8 using CU (n = 280), in high-fidelity porcine phantoms. Tasks were stratified based on aiming to contact (target-contact) or place in close proximity with (target-proximity) targets, needle gauge (no. 18/no. 22), and in-plane (IP) or out-of-plane (OOP) approach. Distance to the target, task completion by aim, number of passes, and number of tasks completed on the first pass were reported. RESULTS: Needle guidance technology significantly improved distance, task completion, number of passes, and completion on the first pass compared with CU for both IP and OOP approaches (P ≤ 0.001). Average NGT distance to target was lower by 57.1% overall (n = 560, 1.5 ± 2.4 vs 3.5 ± 3.7 mm), 38.5% IP (n = 140, 1.6 ± 2.6 vs 2.6 ± 2.8 mm), and 68.2% OOP (n = 140, 1.4 ± 2.2 vs 4.4 ± 4.3 mm) (all P ≤ 0.01). Subgroup analyses revealed accuracy gains were largest among target-proximity tasks performed by residents and for OOP approaches. Needle guidance technology improved first-pass completion from 214 (76.4%) per 280 to 249 (88.9%) per 280, a significant improvement of 16.4% (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Passive magnetic NGT can improve accuracy of needle procedures, particularly among OOP procedures requiring close approach to sensitive targets, such as nerve blocks in anesthesiology practice.