Standard vs atraumatic Whitacre needle for diagnostic lumbar puncture: a randomized trial

Why should we use atraumatic needles in lumbar puncture?

Diagnostic lumbar puncture is essential to the diagnosis of central nervous system infections, subarachnoid haemorrhage and others neurological diseases. Myeloradicular involvement or life-threatening adverse events due to the procedure are rare, but less severe complications are more frequent. Post-lumbar puncture headache is the most common complication, by spinal fluid leakage due to delayed closure of a dural defect. Therefore, the development of fine needles, with differentiated atraumatic bevel, has contributed to minimize that problem. These generically called atraumatic needles cause less deformation of the dura mater then the Quincke® ones. So, why don't we use these atraumatic needles?

Posture and fluids for preventing post-dural puncture headache

BACKGROUND

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a common complication of lumbar punctures. Several theories have identified the leakage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) through the hole in the dura as a cause of this side effect. Therefore, it is necessary to take preventive measures to avoid this complication. Prolonged bed rest has been used as a therapeutic measure once PDPH has started, but it is unknown if it can be also be used to prevent it. Similarly, the value of administering fluids additional to those of normal dietary intake to restore the loss of CSF produced by the puncture is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether prolonged bed rest combined with different body and head positions, as well as administration of supplementary fluids after lumbar puncture, prevent the onset of PDPH in people undergoing lumbar puncture for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS up to June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of bed rest versus early/immediate mobilization, head-down tilt versus horizontal position, prone versus supine positions during bed rest, and administration of supplementary fluids versus no/less supplementation, as prevention measures for PDPH in people who have undergone lumbar puncture.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for eligibility through the web-based software EROS (Early Review Organizing Software). Two different review authors independently assessed risk of bias using the criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We solved any disagreements by consensus. We extracted data on cases of PDPH, severe PDPH, and any headache after lumbar puncture and performed intention-to-treat analyses and sensitivity analyses by risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 trials (2477 participants) in this review. There was no beneficial effect associated with bed rest compared with immediate mobilization on the incidence of PDPH (risk for bed rest 26.4%; risk for mobilization 20.5%; risk ratio (RR) 1.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.55), severe PDPH (risk for bed rest 10.6%; risk for mobilization 10.7%; RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.32), and presence of any headache after lumbar puncture (risk for bed rest 33.6%; risk for mobilization 28.6%; RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.32). Analyses restricted to the most methodologically rigorous trials gave similar results. Likewise, the two trials that assessed fluid supplementation did not find this preventive measure to be useful in the prevention of PDPH.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from RCTs that suggests that routine bed rest after dural puncture is beneficial for the prevention of PDPH onset. The role of fluid supplementation in the prevention of PDPH remains unclear.

[Post-dural puncture headache and blood-patch: theoretical and practical approach]

OBJECTIVE

To review the current research and formulate a rational approach to the physiopathology, cause and treatment of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH).

DATA SOURCES

Articles published to December 2011 were obtained through a search of Medline for the MeSh terms "epidural blood-patch" and "post-dural puncture headache".

STUDY SELECTION

Six hundred and eighty-two pertinent studies were included and 200 were analysed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Resulting of a dural tap after spinal anaesthesia or diagnostic lumbar puncture or as a complication of epidural anaesthesia, PDPH occurs when an excessive leak of cerebrospinal fluid leads to intracranial hypotension associated to a resultant cerebral vasodilatation. Reduction in cerebrospinal fluid volume in upright position may cause traction of the intracranial structure and stretching of vessels. Typically postural, headache may be associated to nausea, photophobia, tinnitus or arm pain and changes in hearing acuity. In severe cases, there may be cranial nerve dysfunction and nerve palsies secondary to traction on those nerves. The Epidural Blood-Patch (EBP) is considered as the "gold standard" in the treatment of PDHP because it induces a prolonged elevation of subarachnoid and epidural pressures, whereas such elevation is transient with saline or dextran. EBP should be performed within 24-48hours of onset of headache; the optimum volume of epidural blood appears to be 15-20mL. Severe complications following EBP are exceptional. The use of echography may be safety puncture. The optimum timing of epidural blood-patch, the resort of repeating procedure if the symptomatology does not disappear, the alternative to the conventional medical treatment need to be determined by future clinical trial.

Drug therapy for preventing post-dural puncture headache

BACKGROUND

Post-dural (post-lumbar or post-spinal) puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the most common complications of diagnostic, therapeutic or inadvertent lumbar punctures. Many drug options have been used to prevent headache in clinical practice and have also been tested in some clinical studies, but there are still some uncertainties about their clinical effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of drugs for preventing PDPH in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

The search strategy included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5), MEDLINE (from 1950 to May 2012), EMBASE (from 1980 to May 2012) and CINAHL (from 1982 to June 2012). There was no language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effectiveness of any drug used for preventing PDPH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias and extracted data. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. We calculated a 95% confidence interval (CI) for each RR and MD. We did not undertake meta-analysis because participants' characteristics or assessed doses of drugs were too different in the included studies. We performed an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (1611 participants) in this review with a majority of women (72%), mostly parturients (women in labour) (913), after a lumbar puncture for regional anaesthesia. Drugs assessed were epidural and spinal morphine, spinal fentanyl, oral caffeine, rectal indomethacin, intravenous cosyntropin, intravenous aminophylline and intravenous dexamethasone.All the included RCTs reported data on the primary outcome, i.e. the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture. Epidural morphine and intravenous cosyntropin reduced the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture when compared to placebo. Also, intravenous aminophylline reduced the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture when compared to no intervention, while intravenous dexamethasone increased it. Spinal morphine increased the number of participants affected by pruritus when compared to placebo, and epidural morphine increased the number of participants affected by nausea and vomiting when compared to placebo. Oral caffeine increased the number of participants affected by insomnia when compared to placebo.The remainder of the interventions analysed did not show any relevant effect for any of the outcomes.None of the included RCTs reported the number of days that patients stayed in hospital.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Morphine and cosyntropin have shown effectiveness for reducing the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture, when compared to placebo, especially in patients with high risk of PDPH, such as obstetric patients who have had an inadvertent dural puncture. Aminophylline also reduced the number of participants affected by PDPH of any severity after a lumbar puncture when compared to no intervention in patients undergoing elective caesarean section. Dexamethasone increased the risk of PDPH, after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section, when compared to placebo. Morphine also increased the number of participants affected by adverse events (pruritus and nausea and vomiting)There is a lack of conclusive evidence for the other drugs assessed (fentanyl, caffeine, indomethacin and dexamethasone).These conclusions should be interpreted with caution, owing to the lack of information, to allow correct appraisal of risk of bias and the small sample sizes of studies.

Introduction of Sprotte needles to a single-centre acute neurology service: before and after study

Objectives

To introduce atraumatic (Sprotte) lumbar puncture needles and compare complication rates with traumatic (Quincke) needles.

Design

Complication rates associated with traumatic needle use were retrospectively analysed over a four-week period. Atraumatic needles were then implemented and a prospective analysis of the complication rates was undertaken for a further six weeks.

Setting

A single-centre acute neurology unit in a London teaching hospital

Participants

Traumatic needles (n = 24 patients); atraumatic needles (n = 36 patients)

Main outcome measures

Headache rates, use of over-the-counter medications, further medical assistance, time off work, nausea and vomiting, traumatic taps (as per the count of red blood cells per millilitre in the first sample of cerebrospinal fluid [CSF]) and back pain.

Results

A comparison of traumatic and atraumatic needles revealed a significant reduction in the incidence of post-lumbar puncture headaches (*P < 0.01), headaches requiring over-the-counter medication (*P < 0.00001), need for further medical assistance (*P < 0.006), time off work (*P < 0.003), nausea and vomiting (*P < 0.01) and traumatic taps as per the count of red blood cells per millilitre in the first sample of CSF (*P < 0.02). There was no significant difference in the incidence of back pain (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Most complication outcomes are significantly lower with the use of atraumatic lumbar puncture needles. We present for the first time in the literature that the rate of ‘traumatic taps’ are significantly lower with atraumatic needles. The implementation of atraumatic needles in an acute neurology service is safe and produces reliable, reproducible results in keeping with previously published randomized controlled trials.

Post-lumbar puncture headache

BACKGROUND

Headache is a complication of lumbar puncture that has been known for more than a hundred years. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the incidence and symptoms of, the risk factors for and the treatment of this type of headache.

METHOD

The article is based on a literature search in PubMed for studies on headache after lumbar puncture followed by discretionary selection of publications.

RESULTS

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is characterised by the occurrence of a headache with a significant orthostatic component within 5 days of a lumbar puncture. The incidence depends on a number of factors. Younger women with a previous history of headaches appear to be at highest risk. The incidence can be significantly reduced by using a thin lumbar puncture needle with an atraumatic tip. The condition is self-limiting and harmless, but leads to significant morbidity. Caffeine alleviates the symptoms and reduces the course of the illness. When bed rest and caffeine prove ineffective, an epidural blood patch works well for the majority, but there is no consensus on when such treatment should be offered.

INTERPRETATION

Headache frequently occurs after lumbar puncture. There is substantial evidence for recommending the use of a thin, atraumatic needle to reduce the incidence. For practical reasons, a needle thinner than 22 G is not suitable for diagnostic lumbar puncture.

No effect of recumbency duration on the occurrence of post-lumbar puncture headache with a 22G cutting needle

Background

Supine recumbence has been widely performed to prevent post-lumbar puncture headache (PLPH). However, the optimal duration of supine recumbence is controversial. The aim of the study is to compare the occurrence of PLPH according to the duration of supine recumbence in patients with neurological disorders.

Methods

A non-equivalent control/experimental pre-/post-test study design was used. Seventy consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled between July 2007 and July 2008. Thirty-five patients underwent supine recumbence for four hours after lumbar puncture (Group 1) and 35 patients underwent supine recumbence for one hour (Group 2).

Results

The overall frequency of PLPH was 31.4%. The frequency of PLPH was not significantly different between the Group 1 (28.6%) and Group 2 (34.3%) (P = 0.607). In patients with PLPH, the median severity (P = 0.203) and median onset time of PLPH (P = 0.582) were not significantly different between the two groups. In a logistic regression analysis, the previous history of post-lumbar puncture headache was a significant risk factor for the occurrence of PLPH (OR = 11.250, 95% CI: 1.10-114.369, P = 0.041).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that short duration (one hour) of supine recumbence may be as efficient as long duration (four hours) of supine recumbence to prevent PLPH.

Novel pulsatile cerebrospinal fluid model to assess pressure manometry and fluid sampling through spinal needles of different gauge: support for the use of a 22 G spinal needle with a tapered 27 G pencil-point tip

BACKGROUND

Parallel-walled spinal needles ≤ 22 G are routinely used for lumbar puncture, despite a reported ≥ 32% incidence of post-dural puncture headache. A tapered spinal needle (22 G shaft, 27 G tip) is in use in our institution. We hypothesized that despite the smaller dural puncture hole, this needle has similar cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure equilibration times and CSF sampling times to a standard 22 G needle and assessed a range of spinal needles using an experimental pulsatile CSF reservoir.

METHODS

The pulsatile CSF reservoir had an oscillating pressure varying between 25 and 15 cm H(2)O at a cycle frequency of 80 s(-1). We tested seven parallel-walled spinal needles (18-27 G) and the tapered 22/27 G needle. CSF pressure was measured every 2 s by manometry. The time to collect 1 ml CSF samples was measured. Saline 0.9% and mannitol 20% were tested separately. One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc test was used to compare 22G, 27G and 22/27G needles.

RESULTS

The mean [standard deviation (sd)] CSF pressure equilibration time (saline) was 40.7 (6.4), 108.7 (6.1), and 51.3 (4.6) s for the 22, 27, and 22/27 G needles (P< 0.0001 for comparisons between 27 G and other needles). The mean (sd) CSF sampling time (saline) was 40.3 (3.1), 225.3 (10.0), and 63.0 (5.2) s for the 22, 27, and 22/27 G needles (P< 0.0001 for comparisons between 27 G and other needles, and P= 0.019 between 22 and 22/27 G needles). Saline was different from mannitol for both measurements and all needles (P< 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A 22/27 G tapered spinal needle has similar flow properties to the 22 G needle, despite a 27 G tip.

Incidence of post-dural puncture headache in research volunteers

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency and risk factors of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) in research volunteers.

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing interest in measuring cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers to investigate disease pathogenesis and diagnosis, previous case series have evaluated lumbar puncture (LP) safety only in clinical care. PDPH is a common complication after LP.

METHODS

We determined the frequency of PDPH in neurologically unselected HIV seropositive and seronegative adults volunteering for research, as well as the variables associated with the development of PDPH. Variables studied were body mass index (BMI), HIV serostatus, volume of CSF removed, number of previous LPs, use of pre-medication, LP position, lumbar space, number of needle passes, whether or not aspiration was used, CSF white blood cell counts, CSF red blood cell counts, CD4 count, CD4 nadir, CSF HIV viral load, plasma HIV viral load, and race.

RESULTS

Of 675 LPs performed over 1 year, headache developed in 38 (5.6%; 95% CI 4.2, 7.1). Most PDPH (92%) resolved spontaneously or with conservative medical management; 3 required epidural blood patch. Greater headache risk was associated with lower BMI (BMI ≤25 vs >25) (OR 3.3; CI 95% 1.5, 7.0; P = .001) and less prior LP experience (previous LPs ≤2 vs >2) (OR 2.1; CI 95% 1.1, 4.1; P = .03). PDPH was not significantly (P > .05) related to HIV serostatus, CSF volume, or gender.

CONCLUSION

In this study, where tolerance to risk was low because LPs were done for research rather than clinical purposes and healthy controls were included, adverse effects were mild and self-limited.

Drug therapy for treating post-dural puncture headache

BACKGROUND

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is the most common complication of lumbar puncture, an invasive procedure frequently performed in the emergency room. Numerous pharmaceutical drugs have been proposed to treat PDPH but there are still some uncertainties about their clinical effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of drugs for treating PDPH in adults and children.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search strategy included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE (from 1950 to June 2011), EMBASE (from 1980 to June 2011) and CINAHL (from 1982 to June 2011). There was no language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of any pharmacological drug used for treating PDPH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias and extracted data. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. We calculated a 95% confidence interval (CI) for each RR and MD. We did not undertake meta-analysis because the included studies assessed different sorts of drugs or different outcomes. We performed an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs (200 participants) in this review (between 88% and 90.5% were women; mostly parturients (84% to 87%) after a lumbar puncture for a regional anaesthesia). Pharmacological drugs assessed were oral and intravenous caffeine, subcutaneous sumatriptan, oral gabapentin, oral theophylline, intravenous hydrocortisone and intramuscular adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH).One RCT reported data about PDPH persistence of any severity at follow up (primary outcome); caffeine reduced the number of participants with PDPH at one to two hours when compared to placebo. Treatment with caffeine also decreased the need for a conservative supplementary therapeutic option. Treatment with gabapentin versus placebo reported better visual analogue scale (VAS) scores after one, two, three and four days; treatment with hydrocortisone plus conventional treatment showed better VAS scores than conventional treatment alone at six, 24 and 48 hours and treatment with theophylline showed a lower mean "sum of pain" when compared with placebo. Sumatriptan and ACTH did not show any relevant effect for this outcome.There were no clinically significant drug adverse events.The rest of the outcomes were not reported by the RCTs or did not show any relevant effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Caffeine has shown effectiveness for treating PDPH, decreasing the proportion of participants with PDPH persistence and those requiring supplementary interventions, when compared with placebo. Gabapentin, theophylline and hydrocortisone have also shown a decrease in pain severity scores when compared with placebo or conventional care.There is a lack of conclusive evidence for the other drugs assessed (sumatriptan and ACTH).These conclusions should be interpreted with caution, due to the lack of information to allow correct appraisal of risk of bias, the small sample sizes of studies and also the limited generalisability, as most participants were post-partum women in their 30s.

Inadvertent injection of a cervical radicular artery using an atraumatic pencil-point needle

STUDY DESIGN

Case report and review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE

To report the first case of inadvertent injection of a cervical radicular artery using an atraumatic pencil-point needle.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Rare complications from cervical transforaminal epidural corticosteroid injection have resulted in infarction of the spinal cord and brain. The most often-hypothesized mechanism is inadvertent intra-arterial injection of particulate corticosteroids with a resulting embolus and infarction.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a patient's history and fluoroscopic imaging.

RESULTS

A 30-year-old man with a diagnosed cervical radiculopathy underwent a right C6-C7 transforaminal epidural corticosteroid injection, using a 25-gauge 3.5-inch Whitacre spinal needle. Simultaneous epidural and radicular artery spread were observed under live fluoroscopy. The patient suffered no complications from the procedure.

CONCLUSION

This case demonstrates that the use of pencil-point (Whitacre) needles does not eliminate the risk of inadvertent arterial injection during cervical transforaminal epidurals. Further investigation is required to determine whether the incidence of inadvertent vascular injection is reduced with pencil-point needles compared with sharp-beveled needles.

Post-dural puncture headache: part I diagnosis, epidemiology, etiology, and pathophysiology

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a frequent complication of dural puncture whether performed for diagnostic purposes or accidentally, as a complication of anesthesia. Because both procedures are common, clinicians interested in headache should be familiar with this entity. The differential diagnosis of PDPH is broad and includes other complications of dural puncture as well as headaches attributable to the condition which lead to the procedure. The patterns of development of PDPH depend on a number of procedure- and nonprocedure-related risk factors. Knowledge of procedure-related factors supports interventions designed to reduce the incidence of PDPH. Finally, despite best preventive efforts, PDPH may still occur and be associated with significant morbidity. Therefore, it is important to know the management and prognosis of this disorder. In this review, we will highlight diagnosis and clinical characteristics of PDPH, differential diagnosis, frequency, and risk factors as well as pathophysiology of PDPH.

Atraumatic lumbar puncture needles: after all these years, are we still missing the point?

BACKGROUND

Cutting needles remain the most commonly used needle design for lumbar puncture in the neurology community, although atraumatic (noncutting) needles have become common and popular for anesthesiologists performing spinal anesthesia.

REVIEW SUMMARY

The use of atraumatic spinal needles for lumbar puncture has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of postdural puncture headache compared with cutting needles, without loss of efficacy or ease of use.

CONCLUSION

The use of noncutting or pencil-point spinal needles should become the standard for performing diagnostic lumbar puncture.

Management of postdural puncture headache in the obstetric patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment of postdural puncture headache remains controversial, largely because it is insufficiently evidence based. With high rates of neuraxial block in the obstetric population likely to continue, postdural puncture headache will remain a primary cause of morbidity and increased duration of hospital stay. This review describes new reports of relevance published in 2006 and until October 2007.

RECENT FINDINGS

New evidence justifies epidural blood patch as the treatment of choice for severe postdural puncture headache, but technical aspects such as optimal timing and volume are less clear. Symptomatic medical management remains diverse, with a multitude of therapies often advocated, despite a lack of scientific support. Reports of misdiagnosis and of complications associated with postdural puncture headache and its treatment emphasize the importance of multidisciplinary management and additional investigation, including radiological imaging, when the clinical picture warrants.

SUMMARY

The key reports in this epoch have shed light on the benefits of careful assessment of postpartum headache and treatment with an epidural blood patch. New management paradigms have been suggested and serious complications continue to be reported.

Diagnostic lumbar puncture: minimizing complications

Diagnostic lumbar puncture (LP) is essential to the diagnosis of central nervous system infections and subarachnoid haemorrhage. Life or limb-threatening adverse events due to the procedure are rare, but less severe complications may be common. Clinical practice in diagnostic LP is often not evidenced based. The aim of the study was to use best available published evidence to address questions on minimizing complications associated with diagnostic LP. We searched PubMed for studies in the English language using key words relevant to the complications of diagnostic LP. We emphasized randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews enrolling adult patients undergoing diagnostic LP. Uncontrolled studies and studies involving children or spinal anaesthesia were considered when no other evidence was available. There were nine prospective studies and three systematic reviews on reducing complications from LP. Recommendations on interventions to minimize complications of LP are graded based on the quality and strength of evidence.