Cargando…
Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block
Caudal block has limited injectate distribution to the desired lumbar level due to the relatively long distance from the injection site and reduction in the volume of injectate due to leakage into the sacral foramen. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of needle gauge on flu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6709147/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31145351 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015896 |
_version_ | 1783446142056398848 |
---|---|
author | Sim, Woo Seog Park, Hue Jung Kwon, Ji Hye Oh, Min Seok Jung, Hyun Joo Cho, Min Kyoung Lee, Jin Young |
author_facet | Sim, Woo Seog Park, Hue Jung Kwon, Ji Hye Oh, Min Seok Jung, Hyun Joo Cho, Min Kyoung Lee, Jin Young |
author_sort | Sim, Woo Seog |
collection | PubMed |
description | Caudal block has limited injectate distribution to the desired lumbar level due to the relatively long distance from the injection site and reduction in the volume of injectate due to leakage into the sacral foramen. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of needle gauge on fluoroscopic epidural spread and to assess the correlation between the spread level and analgesic efficacy in patients undergoing caudal block. We retrospectively analyzed data from 80 patients who received caudal block for lower back and radicular pain. We categorized patients based on the epidural needle gauge used into group A (23 gauge), group B (20 gauge), and group C (17 gauge). Fluoroscopic image of the final level of contrast injected through the caudal needle and pain scores before the block and 30 minutes after the block recorded using a numerical rating scale, were evaluated. Of the 80 patients assessed for eligibility, 7 were excluded. Thus, a total of 73 patients were finally analyzed. Age, sex, body mass index, diagnosis, lesion level, lesion severity, and duration of pain did not differ among the 3 groups. All patients showed cephalic spread of contrast. Contrast spread beyond L5 was seen in 26.9% of patients in group A, 41.7% in group B, 39.1% in group C, and 35.6% overall; there was no significant difference among the groups (P = .517). Analgesic efficacy was not significantly different among the groups (P = .336). The needle gauge did not influence the level of epidural spread or analgesic efficacy in caudal block. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6709147 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67091472019-10-01 Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block Sim, Woo Seog Park, Hue Jung Kwon, Ji Hye Oh, Min Seok Jung, Hyun Joo Cho, Min Kyoung Lee, Jin Young Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article Caudal block has limited injectate distribution to the desired lumbar level due to the relatively long distance from the injection site and reduction in the volume of injectate due to leakage into the sacral foramen. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of needle gauge on fluoroscopic epidural spread and to assess the correlation between the spread level and analgesic efficacy in patients undergoing caudal block. We retrospectively analyzed data from 80 patients who received caudal block for lower back and radicular pain. We categorized patients based on the epidural needle gauge used into group A (23 gauge), group B (20 gauge), and group C (17 gauge). Fluoroscopic image of the final level of contrast injected through the caudal needle and pain scores before the block and 30 minutes after the block recorded using a numerical rating scale, were evaluated. Of the 80 patients assessed for eligibility, 7 were excluded. Thus, a total of 73 patients were finally analyzed. Age, sex, body mass index, diagnosis, lesion level, lesion severity, and duration of pain did not differ among the 3 groups. All patients showed cephalic spread of contrast. Contrast spread beyond L5 was seen in 26.9% of patients in group A, 41.7% in group B, 39.1% in group C, and 35.6% overall; there was no significant difference among the groups (P = .517). Analgesic efficacy was not significantly different among the groups (P = .336). The needle gauge did not influence the level of epidural spread or analgesic efficacy in caudal block. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6709147/ /pubmed/31145351 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015896 Text en Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
spellingShingle | Research Article Sim, Woo Seog Park, Hue Jung Kwon, Ji Hye Oh, Min Seok Jung, Hyun Joo Cho, Min Kyoung Lee, Jin Young Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
title | Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
title_full | Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
title_fullStr | Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
title_full_unstemmed | Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
title_short | Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
title_sort | fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6709147/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31145351 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015896 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simwooseog fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock AT parkhuejung fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock AT kwonjihye fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock AT ohminseok fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock AT junghyunjoo fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock AT chominkyoung fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock AT leejinyoung fluoroscopicevaluationoftheinfluenceofneedlegaugeonepiduralspreadincaudalblock |