Ultrasound Imaging of the Spine for Central Neuraxial Blockade: a Technical Description and Evidence Update

Efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided versus landmark-guided neuraxial puncture: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Data suggest that preprocedural ultrasound may improve the efficacy of central neuraxial puncture. However, it remains uncertain whether these findings can be extended to various clinical scenarios, including diverse patient populations and the application of real-time ultrasound guidance. Additionally, it is unclear whether ultrasound-guided techniques improve safety and patient-centered outcomes.

METHODS

We searched six databases for randomized trials of adult patients undergoing neuraxial puncture, comparing real-time ultrasound, preprocedural ultrasound, and landmark palpation for efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes. Our primary outcome was a failed first-attempt neuraxial puncture. After two-person screening and data extraction, meta-analyses were conducted and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was applied to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Analysis of 71 studies involving 7153 patients, both real-time ultrasound (OR 0.30; 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.15 to 0.58; low certainty) and preprocedural ultrasound (OR 0.33; 95% CrI 0.24 to 0.44; moderate certainty) showed a significant reduction in the risk of a failed first neuraxial puncture. Real-time ultrasound had the best performance for preventing first-attempt failures (low certainty evidence). Although real-time ultrasound was also the leading method for reducing the risk of complete neuraxial puncture failure, the results did not show a statistically significant difference when compared with landmark palpation. Preprocedural ultrasound, however, significantly reduced the odds of complete puncture failure (OR 0.29; 95% CrI 0.11 to 0.61). These ultrasound-guided approaches also contributed to a reduction in certain complications and increased patient satisfaction without any other significant differences in additional outcomes. Trial sequential analysis confirmed that sufficient information was achieved for our primary outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided neuraxial puncture improves efficacy, reduces puncture attempts and needle redirections, reduces complication risks, and increases patient satisfaction, with low to moderate certainty of evidence. Despite real-time ultrasound's high ranking, a clear superiority over preprocedural ultrasound is not established. These results could prompt anesthesiologists and other clinicians to reassess their neuraxial puncture techniques.

Artificial intelligence for ultrasound scanning in regional anaesthesia: a scoping review of the evidence from multiple disciplines

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) for ultrasound scanning in regional anaesthesia is a rapidly developing interdisciplinary field. There is a risk that work could be undertaken in parallel by different elements of the community but with a lack of knowledge transfer between disciplines, leading to repetition and diverging methodologies. This scoping review aimed to identify and map the available literature on the accuracy and utility of AI systems for ultrasound scanning in regional anaesthesia.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library. Clinical trial registries, a registry of doctoral theses, regulatory authority databases, and websites of learned societies in the field were searched. Online commercial sources were also reviewed.

RESULTS

In total, 13,014 sources were identified; 116 were included for full-text review. A marked change in AI techniques was noted in 2016-17, from which point on the predominant technique used was deep learning. Methods of evaluating accuracy are variable, meaning it is impossible to compare the performance of one model with another. Evaluations of utility are more comparable, but predominantly gained from the simulation setting with limited clinical data on efficacy or safety. Study methodology and reporting lack standardisation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of structure to the evaluation of accuracy and utility of AI for ultrasound scanning in regional anaesthesia, which hinders rigorous appraisal and clinical uptake. A framework for consistent evaluation is needed to inform model evaluation, allow comparison between approaches/models, and facilitate appropriate clinical adoption.

Confirming identification of the epidural space: a systematic review of electric stimulation, pressure waveform analysis, and ultrasound and a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy in acute pain

To review the use of epidural electric stimulation test, pressure waveform analysis, and ultrasound assessment of injection as bedside methods for confirming identification of the epidural space in adults with acute pain, the PubMed database was searched for relevant reports between May and August 2022. Studies reporting diagnostic accuracy with conventional Touhy needles and epidural catheters were further selected for meta-analysis. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated using univariate logistic regression for electric stimulation and pressure analysis, and pooling of similar studies for ultrasound. Risk of bias and applicability was assessed using QUADAS-2. For electric stimulation, pressure waveform analysis, and ultrasound, respectively 35, 22, and 28 reports were included in the review and 9, 9, and 7 studies in the meta-analysis. Electric stimulation requires wire-reinforced catheters and an adequate nerve stimulator, does not reliably identify intravascular placement, and is affected by local anaesthetics. Sensitivity was 95% (95% CI 93-96%, N = 550) and specificity unknown (95% CI 33-94%, N = 44). Pressure waveform analysis is unaffected by local anaesthetics, but does not identify intravascular nor intrathecal catheters. Sensitivity was 90% (95% CI 72-97%, N = 694) and specificity 88% (95% CI 78-94%, N = 67). B-mode, M-mode and doppler ultrasound may be challenging, and data is still limited. Risk of bias was significant and accuracy estimates must be interpreted with caution. Electric stimulation and pressure waveform analysis seem clinically useful, although they must be interpreted cautiously. In the future, clinical trials in patients with difficult anatomy will likely be most useful. Ultrasound requires further investigation.

Ultrasound predictors of difficult spinal anesthesia: a prospective single-blind observational study

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound showed to improve the precision and efficacy of spinal anesthesia (SA) through the identification of specific structures surrounding the intrathecal space, such as the anterior and posterior complex of dura mater (DM). The aim of this study was to verify the efficacy of ultrasonography in predicting difficult SA trough the analysis of different ultrasound patterns.

METHODS

This prospective single-blind observational study involved 100 patients undergoing orthopedic or urological surgery. A first operator chose by landmarks the intervertebral space where he wanted to perform SA. Then a second operator recorded the visibility of DM complexes at ultrasound. Subsequently, the first operator, blinded to the ultrasound evaluation, performed SA, defined as "difficult" in case of failure, change of intervertebral space, operator exchange, duration >400 seconds or more than 10 needle passes.

RESULTS

The ultrasound visualization of only posterior complex or the failure in visualization of both complexes showed a positive predictive value of 76% and 100%, respectively, towards difficult SA vs. 6% when both complexes were visible; P<0.001. A negative correlation was found between the number of visible complexes and both patients' age and BMI. Landmark-guided evaluation underestimated the intervertebral level in 30% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound showed a high accuracy in detecting difficult spinal anesthesia and its use should be recommended in the daily clinical practice in order to increase success rate and minimize patient discomfort. The absence of both DM complexes at ultrasound should lead the anesthetist to evaluate other intervertebral levels or consider alternative techniques.

Spinal Subdural Hematoma following Epidural Anesthesia

The spinal subdural space is an avascular, potential space and is a rare location for intraspinal hematomas. Compared to spinal epidural hematomas, spinal subdural hematomas are uncommonly described complications of lumbar puncture for spinal or epidural anesthesia, particularly in patients who have no pre-existing bleeding disorders or history of antiplatelet or anticoagulant intake. We describe a 19-year-old girl who had a large thoracolumbar spinal subdural hematoma following epidural anesthesia for elective cholecystectomy with no pre-existing bleeding diathesis that caused rapidly developing paraplegia that evolved over the next 2 days following surgery. Nine days after the initial surgery she underwent multilevel laminectomy and surgical evacuation with eventual satisfactory recovery. Even epidural anesthesia without thecal sac violation can result in bleeding in the spinal subdural space. The possible sources of bleed in this space may be from injury to an interdural vein or extravasation of subarachnoid bleed into the subdural space. When neurological deficits occur, prompt imaging is mandatory and early evacuation yields gratifying results.

Evaluation of Lumbar Sonography as a Learning Aid for Performing Subarachnoid Block Using the Paramedian Approach by Medical Junior Resident Anaesthesiologists: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pre-procedural ultrasound can be used to identify the subarachnoid space in difficult spinal procedures. However, multiple punctures can result in numerous complications, including post-dural puncture headache, neural trauma, and spinal and epidural haematoma. Thus, the following hypothesis was proposed: in contrast to the conventional blind paramedian dural puncture, pre-procedural ultrasound results in a successful dural puncture on the first attempt.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomised controlled study, 150 consenting patients were randomly assigned to one of the two groups: ultrasound-guided paramedian (UG) and conventional blind paramedian (PG). In the UG paramedian group, pre-procedural ultrasound was performed to mark the insertion site, whereas, in the PG group, the landmark technique was used. A total of 22 different anaesthesiology residents performed all subarachnoid blocks.

RESULTS

The time taken to perform spinal anaesthesia in the UG group was 38-49.5 s, which is shorter than the time taken in the PG group, which was 38-55 s, with a p-value < 0.046, which is statistically significant. The primary outcome of a successful dural puncture on the first attempt was not significantly higher in the UG group (49.33%) than in the PG group (34.67%), with a p-value < 0.068. The number of attempts taken for a successful spinal tap in the UG group was a median of 2.0 (1 to 2), and the PG group had a median of 2 (1 to 2.5), with a p-value < 0.096, which is statistically non-significant.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound guidance showed improvement in the success rate of paramedian anaesthesia. In addition, it improves the success rate of dural puncture and the rate of puncture on the first attempt. It also shortens the time required for a dural puncture. In the general population, the pre-procedural UG paramedian group did not outperform the PG paramedian group.

Comparison of sitting and prone positions for real-time ultrasound-guided thoracic epidural catheter placement: a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Real-time ultrasound-guided thoracic epidural catheter placement (US-TECP) has been recently introduced. Patient’s position is associated with the success of spine interventions; however, the effects of position on the outcome of the procedure remain unknown. We aimed to assess the clinical usefulness of patient positioning during real-time US-TECP.

Methods

Patients were randomly assigned to the prone position group (group P) and sitting position group (group S). The primary outcome was needling time during the procedure. The secondary outcomes were time to mark space, total number of needle passes, number of skin punctures, first-pass success, final success, crossover success, and visibility of ultrasound (US) views. Global Rating Scale (GRS) score, Patient Comfort Scale score, procedural pain intensity, patient satisfaction, and procedure-related complications were also determined.

Results

Sixty-four patients were included in this study. The needling time was significantly shorter in group P than in group S (36.5 (26.5–51.0) vs 59.5 (34.5–152.0) s, p<0.01). The numbers of needle passes and skin punctures were significantly lesser in group P than in group S. First-pass success was higher in group P than in group S. Group P had higher GRS compared with group S. The time to mark space, final success, US visibility score, Patient Comfort Scale score, procedural pain intensity, and patient satisfaction did not differ between the groups. One patient in group S developed a vasovagal reaction.

Discussion

This study shows that prone position may be preferred for real-time US-TECP, considering its better clinical usefulness.

Trial registration number

KCT0005757.