Management of postdural puncture headache in the obstetric patient

The interrelation between body mass index and post-dural puncture headache in parturient women

Background and Aims

Post-dural puncture headache is seen more frequently in pregnant women due to stress, dehydration, intra-abdominal pressure, and insufficient fluid replacement after delivery. Obesity protects against post-dural puncture headache in pregnant women; increased intra-abdominal fat tissue reduced cerebrospinal fluid leakage by increasing the pressure in the epidural space. Therefore, this study investigated the influence of body mass index on post-dural puncture headache in elective cesarean section patients in whom 27G spinal needles were used.

Material and Methods

The study included 464 women who underwent elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Dural puncture performed with a 27G Quincke spinal needle at the L3-4 or L4-5 intervertebral space and given 12.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine intrathecally. The patients were questioned regarding headache and low back pain 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after the procedure, and by phone calls on days 3 and 7.

Results

Post-dural puncture headache developed in 38 (8.2%) patients. Of the patients who developed post-dural puncture headache, 23 (60.5%) had a body mass index <30 and 15 (39.5%) had a body mass index ≥30. Of the patients who did not develop post-dural puncture headache, 258 (60, 6%) had a body mass index <30 and 168 (39, 4%) had a body mass index ≥30.

Conclusion

This prospective study found the body mass index values did not affect post-dural puncture headache in the elective cesarean section performed under spinal anesthesia.

New approaches and therapeutic options for post-dural puncture headache treatment

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a frequent complication in neuraxial approaches. It may result in disability, healthcare dissatisfaction and potentially serious complications. The traditional initial management includes general and analgesia measures with poor evidence. The treatment approach best supported by the literature is the epidural blood patch for which rates of up 70% improvement have been reported. Regional techniques have been recently described that may be helpful because they are less invasive than the epidural blood patch, under certain clinical circumstances. This article suggests an algorithm that uses such techniques for the management of this complication.

Assessment of Neurological Toxicity of Hydroxyethyl Starch 130/0.4 Injected in the Intrathecal Space in Rats

Objective

Epidural blood patch is the procedure of choice to relieve postdural puncture headache. Hydroxyethyl-starch (HES) has been proposed as a patch in some circumstances such as in the case of hematological disease due to the theoretical risk of neoplastic seeding to the central nervous system. Acute neurological HES toxicity has been excluded by a previous animal study, but the long-term neurological toxicity has not been evaluated.

Methods

Rats were randomly assigned to one of three groups: no intrathecal injection, 20 μL of intrathecal saline, or a 20-μL intrathecal HES (6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4) administered via a cervical puncture. Clinical daily rat activity was measured before and after dural puncture by actinometry. The rats were killed at day 28, and the spinal cord was surgically removed and stained with hematoxylin-phloxine-saffron for gross and microscopic examination.

Results

Eleven rats underwent dural puncture without injection, 11 were injected with normal saline, and 12 received intrathecal HES. No clinical or actimetric changes (total distance traveled, number of direction changes, and number of rearings) were observed up to one month after injection. Nonspecific histopathological changes were equally observed in all groups.

Conclusions

The results of the current study indicate that intrathecal injection of HES in rats does not induce any clinical or histopathological evidence of long-term neuronal toxicity. Further safety studies in animals are warranted before HES might be considered a safe alternative to the classic epidural blood patch.

Suboccipital Muscles Injection for Management of Post-Dural Puncture Headache After Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized-Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION:

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is a common complication following neuraxial anaesthesia that increases the duration of hospital stay.

AIM:

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of injection of the dexamethasone-lidocaine mixture in suboccipital muscles treatment of PDPH after cesarean section.

PATIENT AND METHODS:

A group of 90 females with PDPH following cesarean section under spinal anaesthesia were randomly allocated into two equal groups: study group (Group S) and control group (group C). All patients received bilateral intramuscular (in the suboccipital muscle) (Group S) (n = 45) patients received lidocaine 40 mg (2 mL of 2% solution) and dexamethasone 8mg in a total volume of 4 mL; whilst, patients in the control group (group C) (n = 45) received 4 mL normal saline. The primary outcome is the Visual Analogue Score for a headache at 24 hours after injection.

RESULTS:

Demographic data and the baseline, headache score, neck muscle spasm, and nausea were comparable in both groups. Group S showed lower headache score compared to group C at all the post-injection time points. All patients in group S showed resolution of nausea after the intervention; while none of the control group showed any improvement. All patients of group C needed rescue analgesia; while only 6 (13.3%) patients in group S asked for an analgesic. Time to the first analgesic request was longer in group S compared to group C (10.17 ± 7.96 hours versus 1.00 ± 0.00 hours, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION:

Ultrasound-guided injection of the dexamethasone-lidocaine mixture in suboccipital muscles is effective management of PDPH after CS.

Needle gauge and tip designs for preventing post-dural puncture headache (PDPH)

BACKGROUND

Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is one of the most common complications of diagnostic and therapeutic lumbar punctures. PDPH is defined as any headache occurring after a lumbar puncture that worsens within 15 minutes of sitting or standing and is relieved within 15 minutes of the patient lying down. Researchers have suggested many types of interventions to help prevent PDPH. It has been suggested that aspects such as needle tip and gauge can be modified to decrease the incidence of PDPH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of needle tip design (traumatic versus atraumatic) and diameter (gauge) on the prevention of PDPH in participants who have undergone dural puncture for diagnostic or therapeutic causes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and LILACS, as well as trial registries via the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal in September 2016. We adopted the MEDLINE strategy for searching the other databases. The search terms we used were a combination of thesaurus-based and free-text terms for both interventions (lumbar puncture in neurological, anaesthesia or myelography settings) and headache.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in any clinical/research setting where dural puncture had been used in participants of all ages and both genders, which compared different tip designs or diameters for prevention of PDPH DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 70 studies in the review; 66 studies with 17,067 participants were included in the quantitative analysis. An additional 18 studies are awaiting classification and 12 are ongoing. Fifteen of the 18 studies awaiting classification mainly correspond to congress summaries published before 2010, in which the available information does not allow the complete evaluation of all their risks of bias and characteristics. Our main outcome was prevention of PDPH, but we also assessed the onset of severe PDPH, headache in general and adverse events. The quality of evidence was moderate for most of the outcomes mainly due to risk of bias issues. For the analysis, we undertook three main comparisons: 1) traumatic needles versus atraumatic needles; 2) larger gauge traumatic needles versus smaller gauge traumatic needles; and 3) larger gauge atraumatic needles versus smaller gauge atraumatic needles. For each main comparison, if data were available, we performed a subgroup analysis evaluating lumbar puncture indication, age and posture.For the first comparison, the use of traumatic needles showed a higher risk of onset of PDPH compared to atraumatic needles (36 studies, 9378 participants, risk ratio (RR) 2.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 2.67, I2 = 9%).In the second comparison of traumatic needles, studies comparing various sizes of large and small gauges showed no significant difference in effects in terms of risk of PDPH, with the exception of one study comparing 26 and 27 gauge needles (one study, 658 participants, RR 6.47, 95% CI 2.55 to 16.43).In the third comparison of atraumatic needles, studies comparing various sizes of large and small gauges showed no significant difference in effects in terms of risk of PDPH.We observed no significant difference in the risk of paraesthesia, backache, severe PDPH and any headache between traumatic and atraumatic needles. Sensitivity analyses of PDPH results between traumatic and atraumatic needles omitting high risk of bias studies showed similar results regarding the benefit of atraumatic needles in the prevention of PDPH (three studies, RR 2.78, 95% CI 1.26 to 6.15; I2 = 51%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-quality evidence that atraumatic needles reduce the risk of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) without increasing adverse events such as paraesthesia or backache. The studies did not report very clearly on aspects related to randomization, such as random sequence generation and allocation concealment, making it difficult to interpret the risk of bias in the included studies. The moderate quality of the evidence for traumatic versus atraumatic needles suggests that further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect.

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. It is therefore necessary to take preventive measures to avoid this complication. Prolonged bed rest has been used to treat PDPH once it has started, but it is unknown whether prolonged bed rest can 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. This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 7, 2013) on "Posture and fluids for preventing post-dural puncture headache".

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 Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS, as well as trial registries up to February 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of bed rest versus 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 resolved 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. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 trials with 2996 participants in this updated review. The number of participants in each trial varied from 39 to 382. Most of the included studies compared bed rest versus immediate mobilization, and only two assessed the effects of supplementary fluids versus no supplementation. We judged the overall risk of bias of the included studies as low to unclear. The overall quality of evidence was low to moderate, downgraded because of the risk of bias assessment in most cases. The primary outcome in our review was the presence of PDPH.There was low quality evidence for an absence of benefits associated with bed rest compared with immediate mobilization on the incidence of severe PDPH (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.41; participants = 1568; studies = 9) and moderate quality evidence on the incidence of any headache after lumbar puncture (RR 1.16; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.32; participants = 2477; studies = 18). Furthermore, bed rest probably increased PDPH (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.48; participants = 1519; studies = 12) compared with immediate mobilization. An analysis restricted to the most methodologically rigorous trials (i.e. those with low risk of bias in allocation method, missing data and blinding of outcome assessment) gave similar results. There was low quality evidence for an absence of benefits associated with fluid supplementation on the incidence of severe PDPH (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.73; participants = 100; studies = 1) and PDPH (RR 1; 95% CI 0.59 to 1.69; participants = 100; studies = 1), and moderate quality evidence on the incidence of any headache after lumbar puncture (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.34; participants = 200; studies = 2). We did not expect other adverse events and did not assess them in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the previous version of this review, we found one new study for inclusion, but the conclusion remains unchanged. We considered the quality of the evidence for most of the outcomes assessed in this review to be low to moderate. As identified studies had shortcomings on aspects related to randomization and blinding of outcome assessment, we therefore downgraded the quality of the evidence. In general, there was no evidence suggesting 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.

Risk factors for accidental dural puncture during epidural anesthesia for laboring women

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Accidental dural puncture (ADP) during epidural analgesia is a debilitating complication. Symptoms of ADP post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) are headache while rising from supine to upright position, nausea, and neck stiffness. While age, gender and needle characteristics are established risk factors for ADP, little is known about risk factors in laboring women.

METHODS

All cases of ADP during epidural analgesia treated with blood-patching during a 3-years period were retrospectively reviewed. Each case was matched to two controls according to delivery period.

RESULTS

Forty-nine cases of blood patches after ADP out 17 977 epidural anesthesia procedures were identified (0.27%). No differences were found between cases and controls with regards to body mass index, labor stage at time of epidural, length of second stage, location of epidural along the lumbar vertebrae, anesthesiologist's experience or time when epidural was done. In cases of ADP, significantly lower doses of local anesthetics were injected (10.9 versus 13.5 cc, p < 0.001); anesthesiologists reported significantly more trials of epidurals (70 versus 2.8% more than one trial, p < 0.001), more patient movement during the procedure (13 versus 0%, p < 0.001), more intra-procedure suspicion of ADP (69 versus 0%, p < 0.001) and more cases where CSF/blood was drawn with the syringe (57 versus 2.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ADP during labor is a rare but debilitating complication. Risk factors for this iatrogenic complication include patient movement and repeated epidural trials. Intra-procedure identification of ADP is common, allowing early intervention with blood patching where indicated.

Drug therapy for treating post-dural puncture headache

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 8, 2011, on 'Drug therapy for treating post-dural puncture headache'.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 METHODS

The searches included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE and MEDLINE in Process (from 1950 to 29 July 2014), EMBASE (from 1980 to 29 July 2014) and CINAHL (from 1982 to July 2014). There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of any pharmacological drug used for treating PDPH. Outcome measures considered for this review were: PDPH persistence of any severity at follow-up (primary outcome), daily activity limited by headache, conservative supplementary therapeutic option offered, epidural blood patch performed, change in pain severity scores, improvements in pain severity scores, number of days participants stay in hospital, any possible adverse events and missing data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk 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 13 small RCTs (479 participants) in this review (at least 274 participants were women, with 118 parturients after a lumbar puncture for regional anaesthesia). In the original version of this Cochrane review, only seven small RCTs (200 participants) were included. Pharmacological drugs assessed were oral and intravenous caffeine, subcutaneous sumatriptan, oral gabapentin, oral pregabalin, oral theophylline, intravenous hydrocortisone, intravenous cosyntropin and intramuscular adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH).Two RCTs reported data for 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 resulted in better visual analogue scale (VAS) scores after one, two, three and four days when compared with placebo and also when compared with ergotamine plus caffeine at two, three and four days. Treatment with hydrocortisone plus conventional treatment showed better VAS scores at six, 24 and 48 hours when compared with conventional treatment alone and also when compared with placebo. Treatment with theophylline showed better VAS scores compared with acetaminophen at two, six and 12 hours and also compared with conservative treatment at eight, 16 and 24 hours. Theophylline also showed a lower mean "sum of pain" when compared with placebo. Sumatriptan and ACTH did not show any relevant effect for this outcome.Theophylline resulted in a higher proportion of participants reporting an improvement in pain scores when compared with conservative treatment.There were no clinically significant drug adverse events.The rest of the outcomes were not reported by the included RCTs or did not show any relevant effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

None of the new included studies have provided additional information to change the conclusions of the last published version of the original Cochrane review. 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, hydrocortisone and theophylline have been shown to decrease pain severity scores. Theophylline has also been shown to increase the proportion of participants that report an improvement in pain scores when compared with conventional treatment.There is a lack of conclusive evidence for the other drugs assessed (sumatriptan, adrenocorticotropic hormone, pregabalin and cosyntropin).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 the studies and also their limited generalisability, as nearly half of the participants were postpartum women in their 30s.

Neurotoxicity of intrathecal 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 injection in a rat model

Epidural blood patch is the gold standard treatment for post-dural puncture headache, although hydroxyethyl starch may be a useful alternative to blood if the latter is contraindicated. The aim of this experimental study was to assess whether hydroxyethyl starch given via an indwelling intrathecal catheter resulted in clinical or histopathological changes suggestive of neurotoxicity. The study was conducted in rats that were randomly allocated to receive three 10-μl injections on consecutive days of either saline or hydroxyethyl starch administered via the intrathecal catheter. Eight rats were given injections of saline 0.9% and 11 were given 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 derived from thin boiling waxy corn starch in 0.9% sodium chloride (Voluven). Daily clinical evaluation, activity measured by actimetry and neuropathological analysis of the spinal cord were subsequently performed to assess for signs of neurotoxicity. No clinical or actimetric changes were observed in either group following intrathecal saline or hydroxyethyl starch administration. Histopathological examination showed non-specific changes with no differences between the two groups. This experimental study in the rat suggests that repeated intrathecal injection of hydroxyethyl starch is not associated with neurotoxicity.

Accidental dural puncture: combination of prophylactic methods to avoid post-dural puncture headache

Accidental dural puncture (ADP) is a common complication of epidural catheter insertion, and may lead to post-dural puncture headache (PDPH), especially in obstetric patients. Epidural blood patch (BP) is the most effective treatment of PDPH. Prophylactic BP has shown its efficacy to prevent PDPH; nevertheless, this method may be insufficient. We report an ADP case before induction of labor in a 28-year-old parturient. To avoid PDPH, an intrathecal catheter was immediately inserted after ADP and an epidural catheter was also inserted at the interspace above. Catheters were kept in place for more than 24hours. A prophylactic BP was performed immediately after removal of the intrathecal catheter. The patient did not experience any headache. This combination of treatments (intrathecal catheter insertion+prophylactic BP) may be a good alternative approach to prevent PDPH, even if it has to be warranted by other clinical studies.

WITHDRAWN: Epidural blood patching for preventing and treating post-dural puncture headache

This review is out of date, and the original authors are no longer available to update it.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

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.

Epidural injection of hydroxyethyl starch in the management of postdural puncture headache

Epidural blood patch is the standard treatment for postdural puncture headache when symptomatic therapy is ineffective. We report the cases of two patients who received an epidural injection of hydroxyethyl starch when an epidural blood patch was contraindicated; one due to Streptococcus agalactiae bacteraemia and one due to acute leukaemia. Relief of headache was achieved in both patients with no adverse effects. The use of an epidural hydroxyethyl starch injection may be a suitable alternative for treatment of postdural puncture headache if epidural blood patch is contraindicated.

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.

Gabapentin in the treatment of post-dural puncture headache: a case series

Gabapentin has been reported to be useful in the management of epilepsy, neuropathic pain and post-dural puncture headache. Seventeen obstetric cases are presented in which gabapentin was used either as a primary therapy for the management of severe headache following a diagnosed dural puncture or as an analgesic adjunct in patients with dural puncture headache unresponsive to epidural blood patch. In our patients, analgesic therapy was essential to enable care of their newborns as other management options had failed or were unavailable. In nine patients we observed an excellent result with reduction of headache severity within 24 hours. Gabapentin appears potentially beneficial in the management of patients with post-dural puncture headaches.

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.

[Epidural blood patch to treat severe postdural puncture headache after ambulatorysurgery]

We report a case of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) after outpatient hysteroscopy under spinal anesthesia in which a 25-gauge Whitacre needle was used. Symptoms of PDPH appeared 6 hours after surgery. The headache improved with oral caffein and intravenous corticosteroids and the patient was discharged after 24 hours. Later, she was attended twice in the emergency departments of 2 hospitals, where she received conventional treatment (analgesics and corticosteroids). Eleven days after the surgical procedure, an epidural blood patch was performed. Within 12 hours the incapacitating symptoms had improved markedly and resolution was complete 2 months after surgery. PDPH worthy of blood patch treatment is a rare complication of spinal anesthesia with pencil-point needles. Clear diagnostic protocols are required if satisfactory treatment is not to be delayed and unnecessary suffering is to be prevented.

Epidural blood patching for preventing and treating post-dural puncture headache

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in Issue 2, 2002. Dural puncture is a common procedure, but leakage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from the resulting dural defect may cause post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) after the procedure, and this can be disabling. Injecting an epidural blood patch around the site of the defect may stop this leakage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the possible benefits and harms of epidural blood patching in both prevention and treatment of PDPH.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane PaPaS Group Trials Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE and EMBASE in April 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared epidural blood patch versus no epidural blood patch in the prevention or treatment of PDPH among all types of participants undergoing dural puncture for any reason. The primary outcome of effectiveness was postural headache.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author extracted details of trial methodology and outcome data from studies considered eligible for inclusion. We invited authors of all such studies to provide any details that were unavailable in the published reports. We performed intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses using the Peto O-E method. We also extracted information about adverse effects (post-dural puncture backache and epidural infection).

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies (379 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Prophylactic epidural blood patch improved PDPH compared to no treatment (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.64, one study), conservative treatment (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.14, two studies) and epidural saline patch (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.55, one study). However, prophylactic epidural blood patch did not result in less PDPH than a sham procedure (one study). Therapeutic epidural blood patch resulted in less PDPH than conservative treatment (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.76, one study) and a sham procedure (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.39, one study). Backache was more common with epidural blood patch. However, these studies had very small numbers of participants and outcome events, as well as uncertainties about trial methodology, which preclude reliable assessments of the potential benefits and harms of the intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review authors do not recommend prophylactic epidural blood patch over other treatments because there are too few trial participants to allow reliable conclusions to be drawn. However, therapeutic epidural blood patch showed a benefit over conservative treatment, based on the limited available evidence.

[Postpartum cerebral venous sinus thrombosis after epidural anaesthesia]

Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis during pregnancy or puerperium is not a rarity. Nevertheless, it is often misdiagnosed. With the increasing use of regional anaesthesia in obstetrics the differential diagnosis of postdural puncture headache is often difficult. The case of a patient is reported who suffered from both intracranial hypotension and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis in the postpartum period.