[Post-dural puncture headache]

Intranasal Lidocaine Administration via Mucosal Atomization Device: A Simple and Successful Treatment for Postdural Puncture Headache in Obstetric Patients

(1) Background: Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) remains a serious complication in obstetric patients. While the epidural blood patch represents the current gold standard in therapy, a growing number of alternative measures are thought to be beneficial for clinical management. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively analyze the efficacy of intranasal lidocaine administration to treat PDPH in obstetrics at our university hospital; (2) Methods: A retrospective analysis of the medical records of patients with PDPH has been performed focusing on the techniques of administration, dosing, treatment duration, impact on pain intensity as well as side effects of intranasal lidocaine; (3) Results: During the study period, 5610 obstetric patients received neuraxial anesthesia, of whom 43 (0.77%) developed PDPH. About one third of the patients with PDPH after spinal anesthesia (n = 8), epidural anesthesia (n = 5) or both (n = 2) were treated with intranasal lidocaine. Lidocaine was administered either via gauze compresses (GC, n = 4), a mucosal atomization device (MAD, n = 8) or with a second-line mucosal atomization device due to low gauze compress efficacy (n = 3). All patients treated with lidocaine refused the epidural blood patch. Nebulization of lidocaine resulted in a significant reduction in pain intensity after the first dose (p = 0.008). No relevant side effects developed except sporadic temporal pharyngeal numbness. The utilization of the mucosal atomization device averted the necessity for an epidural blood patch, whether employed as the primary or secondary approach; (4) Conclusions: Our data imply that the mucosal atomization device enhances the efficacy of intranasal lidocaine administration in obstetric patients suffering from PDPH.

[Postdural puncture headache in obstetrics : Pathogenesis, diagnostics and treatment]

Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the most important complications of peripartum neuraxial analgesia. Loss of cerebrospinal fluid volume and pressure as well as compensatory intracranial vasodilation are assumed to be responsible. Potentially severe long-term sequelae necessitate the correct diagnosis of PDPH, exclusion of relevant differential diagnoses (with atypical symptoms and when indicated via imaging techniques) and rapid initiation of effective treatment. Nonopioid analgesics, caffeine and occasionally theophylline, gabapentin and hydrocortisone are the cornerstones of pharmacological treatment, while the timely placement of an autologous epidural blood patch (EBP) represents the gold standard procedure when symptoms persist despite the use of analgesics. Procedures using neural treatment are promising alternatives, especially when an EBP is not desired by the patient or is contraindicated. Interdisciplinary and interprofessional consensus standard procedures can contribute to optimization of the clinical management of this relevant complication.

[Intranasal lidocaine atomization as novel and noninvasive treatment option for postdural puncture headache : Two case reports from obstetric anesthesiology]

Hintergrund

Der Postpunktionskopfschmerz („postdural puncture headache“ [PDPH]) stellt eine ernsthafte anästhesiologische Komplikation geburtshilflich behandelter Patientinnen dar. Führen konservativ-medikamentöse Therapieversuche nicht zu einer Symptomlinderung, empfehlen aktuelle Leitlinien die frühzeitige Durchführung eines epiduralen Blut-Patch. Als potenzielle Alternative wird die transnasale Blockade des Ganglion sphenopalatinum mittels Lokalanästhetika diskutiert.

Methode

In dieser Falldarstellung wird erstmals von einer Modifikation dieser Technik unter Anwendung eines Medikamentenzerstäubers („mucosal atomization device“ [MAD]) zur Therapie eines PDPH bei zwei geburtshilflichen Patientinnen berichtet. Über dieses Verfahren existieren bislang keine Erfahrungen aus der geburtshilflichen Anästhesiologie.

Ergebnisse

Die erste Patientin (25-jährige Zweitgravida, BMI 54,7 kg/m²) zeigte am ersten Tag nach Sectio caesarea in Spinalanästhesie einen ausgeprägten PDPH mit starker Übelkeit und Erbrechen. Bei der zweiten Patientin (32-jährige Drittgravida, BMI 27,3 kg/m²) kam es 4 Tage nach Spontanpartus unter Periduralanästhesie zu einer PDPH-bedingten Wiederaufnahme. Während konservative Maßnahmen sowie Therapieversuche mit Nichtopioidanalgetika und Koffein keinen hinreichenden Behandlungserfolg erzielten, führte die intranasale Lidocainapplikation mittels MAD zu einer unmittelbaren und persistierenden Linderung der Beschwerden. Von beiden Patientinnen wurde die Lidocaingabe sehr gut vertragen; sie konnten am Folgetag aus dem Krankenhaus entlassen werden.

Schlussfolgerung

Die vorgestellte nichtinvasive und einfach durchzuführende Maßnahme stellt eine wertvolle Ergänzung bisheriger Therapieoptionen und eine potenzielle Alternative zum epiduralen Blutpatch bei geburtshilflichen Patientinnen mit PDPH dar.

[Postdural puncture headache after neuraxial anesthesia: incidence and risk factors]

Hintergrund/Ziel der Arbeit

Der postpunktionelle Kopfschmerz (PKS) ist eine Komplikation nach rückenmarknahen Verfahren (RA) mit erheblichem Krankheitswert. Ziel der Untersuchung war es, die Inzidenz des PKS in 2 großen operativen Kollektiven zu untersuchen, mögliche Risikofaktoren zu identifizieren und den Einfluss auf die Krankenhausverweildauer zu untersuchen.

Material und Methoden

In einer retrospektiven Analyse des Zeitraums 2010–2012 wurden 341 unfallchirurgische (UCH) und 2113 geburtsmedizinische (GEB) Patient*innen nach Spinalanästhesie (SPA) analysiert. In der statistischen Auswertung (SPSS-23) kamen univariate Analysen mittels Mann-Whitney-U-, Chi²- und Student’s t‑Test sowie logistische Regressionsanalysen zur Anwendung.

Ergebnisse

Die Inzidenz des PKS betrug in der UCH-Gruppe 5,9 % und in der GEB-Gruppe 1,8 %. Patient*innen mit PKS in der UCH wiesen ein jüngeres Patientenalter (38 vs. 47 Jahre, p = 0,011), einen geringeren BMI (23,5 vs. 25,2, p = 0,037) sowie ein niedrigeres Köpergewicht (70,5 kg vs. 77 kg, p = 0,006) als Patient*innen ohne PKS auf. Dabei konnten das Alter mit einer „odds ratio“ (OR 97,5 % Konfidenzintervall [KI]) von 0,963 (97,5% KI 0,932–0,991, p = 0,015) und das Köpergewicht mit einer OR von 0,956 (97,5 % KI 0,920–0,989, p = 0,014) als unabhängige Risikofaktoren für die Entstehung eines PKS identifiziert werden. In der GEB wies die SPA eine höhere Inzidenz des PKS auf als die kombinierte Spinalepiduralanästhesie (CSE) (8,6 % vs. 1,2 %, p < 0,001). Dabei erwies sich das Verfahren mit einer OR von 0,049 (97,5 % KI 0,023–0,106, p < 0,001) als unabhängiger Risikofaktor für die Entstehung eines PKS. In beiden Gruppen war der PKS mit einem verlängerten Krankenhausaufenthalt assoziiert (UCH-Gruppe 4 vs. 2 Tage, p = 0,001; GEB-Gruppe 6 vs. 4 Tage, p < 0.0005).

Diskussion

Die Inzidenz des PKS nach SPA/CSE war in unserer Untersuchung in den beschriebenen Patientengruppen unterschiedlich, mit einem deutlich höheren Anteil in der UCH-Gruppe. Alter, Konstitution und Verfahren waren hinweisgebende Risikofaktoren eines PKS. In Anbetracht der funktionellen Einschränkungen (Mobilisation, Versorgung des Neugeborenen) und des verlängerten Krankenhausaufenthalts, sollten zukünftige Studien eine frühe Behandlung des PKS untersuchen.

Vocal fold paralysis due to intracranial hypotension following spinal anesthesia

Cranial nerve palsy is a rare neurological complication of epidural and subarachnoid blocks. Most of these complications are attributed to secondary intracranial hypotension due to cerebrospinal fluid leakage following dural puncture. Vocal fold paralysis (VFP) seems more likely to be overlooked and underreported due to delayed onset of symptoms and lack of attribution of dysphonia to spinal anesthesia. Therefore, VFP can often be missed and described as idiopathic. This article describes a case of VFP due to vagus nerve injury following subarachnoid block.

[Unilateral spinal anesthesia : Literature review and recommendations]

Unilateral spinal anesthesia is a cost-effective and rapidly performed anesthetic technique. An exclusively unilateral block only affects the sensory, motor and sympathetic functions on one side of the body and offers the advantages of a spinal block without the typical adverse side effects seen with a bilateral block. The lack of hypotension, in particular, makes unilateral spinal anesthesia suitable for patients with cardiovascular risk factors e. g. aortic valve stenosis or coronary artery disease. Increasing numbers of surgical procedures are now being performed on an outpatient basis. Until now, spinal anesthesia has been considered unsuitable for this, not only because of the high incidence of intraoperative hypotension and postoperative urinary retention but also because of the prolonged postoperative stay before home discharge. This is not the case with unilateral spinal anesthesia: motor function returns rapidly, the incidence of urinary retention is extremely low, and patients are usually eligible for home discharge sooner than after bilateral spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia. The success of the technique depends on a number of factors. In addition to the local anesthetic, its concentration and dose, and the baricity of the injected solution, the shape of the spinal needle, the injection speed, the patient's position during injection, and the time the patient remains in this position after injection are equally important parameters. A number of intrathecally applied adjuvant drugs are used to give a more intense and/or longer-lasting block. For this review, we collated the published data on unilateral spinal anesthesia from journals with an impact factor greater than 1.0 and defined an optimized method for performing the technique. In order to achieve an exclusively unilateral block one should use 0.5 % hyperbaric bupivacaine injected at a rate of 0.33 ml/min or slower. During the injection and the following 20 min the patient should lie in the lateral decubitus position on the side intended for surgery with knees drawn to the chest. An injection of 5 mg (1 ml) hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5 % provides an hour-long block to T 12, and a dose of 7.5 to 10 mg (1.5-2.0 ml) extends the block to T 6. Adding clonidine (0.5 to 1.0 µg/kg BW) to the injection prolongs the duration of the block to approximately two to three hours. During the 20-minute fixation period, the cephalad spread of the block can be influenced to a certain extent by raising or lowering the head of the table.

Is there a difference in postdural puncture headache after continuous spinal anesthesia with 28G microcatheters compared with punctures with 22G Quincke or Sprotte spinal needles?

In this retrospective study, the question was raised and answered whether the rate of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) after continuous spinal anesthesia with a 28G microcatheter varies using a Quincke or a Sprotte needle. The medical records of all patients with allogenic joint replacement of the knee or hip or arthroscopic surgery of the knee joint undergoing continuous spinal anesthesia with a 22G Quincke (n=1,212) or 22G Sprotte needle (n=377) and a 28G microcatheter during the past 6 years were reviewed. We obtained the approval of the ethical committee. The rates of PDPH were statistically not different between both groups: 1.5% of patients developed PDPH after dura puncture with a Quincke needle and 2.1% with a Sprotte needle in women and men.