Efficacy of greater occipital nerve block for pain relief in patients with postdural puncture headache: A meta-analysis

Occipital Nerve Block Compared With Acetaminophen and Caffeine for Headache Treatment in Pregnancy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of occipital nerve block compared with standard care , defined as acetaminophen with caffeine, for treatment of acute headache in pregnancy.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, unblinded, parallel, randomized controlled trial of pregnant patients with headache and pain score higher than 3 on the visual rating scale. Patients with secondary headache, preeclampsia, or allergy or contraindication to study medications were excluded. Participants were randomized to occipital nerve block or standard care (oral 650 mg acetaminophen and 200 mg caffeine). Crossover treatment was given at 2 hours and second-line treatment at 4 hours to those with worsening visual rating scale score or visual rating scale score higher than 3. The primary outcome was headache improvement to a visual rating scale score of 3 or lower within 2 hours of initial therapy. Secondary outcomes included serial visual rating scale scores, receipt of crossover or second-line therapy, patient satisfaction, and perinatal outcomes. Outcomes were assessed in an intention-to-treat analysis. We estimated that a sample of 62 would provide 80% power to detect a difference from 85% to 50% between groups.

RESULTS

From February 2020 to May 2022, 62 participants were randomized to occipital nerve block (n=31) or standard care (n=31). Groups were similar except payer status. The primary outcome, headache improvement to visual rating scale score of 3 or lower, was not significantly different between groups (64.5% vs 51.6%, P =.30). The occipital nerve block group experienced lower median [interquartile range] visual rating scale scores at 1 hour (2 [0-5] vs 6 [2-7], P =.014), and more patients in the occipital nerve block group had visual rating scale scores of 3 or lower at 1 hour. Among patients receiving crossover treatment at 2 hours, the standard care group had a significantly lower visual rating scale score 1 hour after crossover to occipital nerve block than the occipital nerve block group receiving crossover to standard care ( P =.028). There were no significant differences in second-line treatment, refractory headache, satisfaction, or complications. Patients receiving occipital nerve block delivered earlier (36.6 weeks vs 37.8 weeks), but preterm birth did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Occipital nerve block is an effective and quick-acting treatment option for acute headache in pregnancy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03951649.

Etiology, management, and sequela of postdural puncture headache

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to provide readers with a concise overview of the cause, incidence, treatment of, and sequalae of postdural puncture headaches (PDPH). Over the past 2 years, much data has been published on modifiable risk factors for PDPH, treatments for PDPH, and sequalae of PDPH particularly long-term.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is emerging data about how modifiable risk factors for PDPH are not as absolute as once believed. There have been several new meta-analysis and clinical trials published, providing more data about effective therapies for PDPH. Significantly, much recent data has come out about the sequalae, particularly long-term of dural puncture.

SUMMARY

Emerging evidence demonstrates that in patients who are at low risk of PDPH, needle type and gauge may be of no consequence in a patient developing a PDPH. Although epidural blood patch (EBP) remains the gold-standard of therapy, several other interventions, both medical and procedural, show promise and may obviate the need for EBP in patients with mild-moderate PDPH. Patients who endure dural puncture, especially accidental dural puncture (ADP) are at low but significant risk of developing short term issues as well as chronic pain symptoms.

Differences in Regional Anesthesia Utilization by Hospital Region in the United States

BACKGROUND

Regional anesthesia has been associated with improved postoperative outcomes. Disparities in regional anesthesia utilization exist; however, no studies have examined utilization rates as a function of hospital region.

METHODS

A national hospital database (Hospital Corporation of America {HCA}) was queried for patients aged 18 years or older that received selected surgical procedure codes between January 2016 and June 2021. Surgical procedures included were total knee arthroplasty (TKA), total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), carpal tunnel release, total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of the ankle, and arteriovenous (AV) fistula creation. Regional anesthesia was defined as any form of neuraxial and/or peripheral nerve blocks. Basic summary statistics were utilized to calculate the rates of regional anesthesia (RA), and chi-squared analyses were calculated to determine significant differences in the rate of RA utilization.

RESULTS

There were 52,068 patients included in this study, of which 2,114 (4.1%) received RA. The greatest RA rates were for TSA (5.8%), TKA (4.5), and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) (3.6%), whereas the lowest RA rate was for TAH (1.1%). For the TKA cohort, the Midwest had a significantly greater utilization rate than the South or West (10.9% vs. 4.8% or 3.1%, p<0.001). The Midwest also had the highest utilization rate in the ACLR cohort (8.1%, p<0.001), TAH cohort (16.7%, p<0.001), and AV fistula cohort (6.4%, p<0.001). For the carpal tunnel cohort, the West had the highest utilization rate (11.8% vs. 8.1%, 1.1%, 0%, p<0.001). The West region also had the highest utilization rate for the ankle ORIF (7.8%, p<0.001). No significant differences were found by region for TSA (p=0.31).

CONCLUSION

Significant variations in RA utilization rates were found by region, with the West having the highest utilization for ankle ORIF and carpal tunnel, and the Midwest having the highest rate for TKA, ACLR, TAH, and AV fistula.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on postdural puncture headache: a consensus report from a multisociety international working group

INTRODUCTION

Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) can follow unintentional dural puncture during epidural techniques or intentional dural puncture during neuraxial procedures such as a lumbar puncture or spinal anesthesia. Evidence-based guidance on the prevention, diagnosis or management of this condition is, however, currently lacking. This multisociety guidance aims to fill this void and provide practitioners with comprehensive information and patient-centric recommendations to prevent, diagnose and manage patients with PDPH.

METHODS

Based on input from committee members and stakeholders, the committee cochairs developed 10 review questions deemed important for the prevention, diagnosis and management of PDPH. A literature search for each question was performed in MEDLINE (Ovid) on 2 March 2022. The results from each search were imported into separate Covidence projects for deduplication and screening, followed by data extraction. Additional relevant clinical trials, systematic reviews and research studies published through March 2022 were also considered for the development of guidelines and shared with contributors. Each group submitted a structured narrative review along with recommendations graded according to the US Preventative Services Task Force grading of evidence. The interim draft was shared electronically, with each collaborator requested to vote anonymously on each recommendation using two rounds of a modified Delphi approach.

RESULTS

Based on contemporary evidence and consensus, the multidisciplinary panel generated 50 recommendations to provide guidance regarding risk factors, prevention, diagnosis and management of PDPH, along with their strength and certainty of evidence. After two rounds of voting, we achieved a high level of consensus for all statements and recommendations. Several recommendations had moderate-to-low certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

These clinical practice guidelines for PDPH provide a framework to improve identification, evaluation and delivery of evidence-based care by physicians performing neuraxial procedures to improve the quality of care and align with patients' interests. Uncertainty remains regarding best practice for the majority of management approaches for PDPH due to the paucity of evidence. Additionally, opportunities for future research are identified.

Consensus Practice Guidelines on Postdural Puncture Headache From a Multisociety, International Working Group: A Summary Report

Importance

Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) can follow unintentional dural puncture during epidural techniques or intentional dural puncture during neuraxial procedures, such as a lumbar puncture or spinal anesthesia. Evidence-based guidance on the prevention, diagnosis, and management of this condition is, however, currently lacking.

Objective

To fill the practice guidelines void and provide comprehensive information and patient-centric recommendations for preventing, diagnosing, and managing PDPH.

Evidence Review

With input from committee members and stakeholders of 6 participating professional societies, 10 review questions that were deemed important for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of PDPH were developed. A literature search for each question was performed in MEDLINE on March 2, 2022. Additional relevant clinical trials, systematic reviews, and research studies published through March 2022 were also considered for practice guideline development and shared with collaborator groups. Each group submitted a structured narrative review along with recommendations that were rated according to the US Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence. Collaborators were asked to vote anonymously on each recommendation using 2 rounds of a modified Delphi approach.

Findings

After 2 rounds of electronic voting by a 21-member multidisciplinary collaborator team, 47 recommendations were generated to provide guidance on the risk factors for and the prevention, diagnosis, and management of PDPH, along with ratings for the strength and certainty of evidence. A 90% to 100% consensus was obtained for almost all recommendations. Several recommendations were rated as having moderate to low certainty. Opportunities for future research were identified.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this consensus statement suggest that current approaches to the treatment and management of PDPH are not uniform due to the paucity of evidence. The practice guidelines, however, provide a framework for individual clinicians to assess PDPH risk, confirm the diagnosis, and adopt a systematic approach to its management.

Greater occipital nerve block in the treatment of headaches. Review of evidence

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral nerve blocks have been a common treatment for multiple headaches. By far, the greater occipital nerve block is the most used and with the stronger body of evidence in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed Meta-Analysis/Systematic Review, in the last 10 years. Of these results, meta-analyses, and in the absence of these systematic reviews, assessing Greater Occipital Nerve Block in headache has been selected for review.

RESULTS

We identified 95 studies in Pubmed, 13 that met the inclusion criteria.

CONCLUSION

Greater occipital block is an effective and safe technique, easy to perform and which has shown its usefulness in migraine, cluster headache, cervicogenic headache and Post-dural puncture headache. However, more studies are needed to clarify its long-term efficacy, its place in clinical treatment, the possible difference between different anaesthetics, the most convenient dosage and the role of concomitant use of corticosteroids.

Headaches in Pregnancy and Postpartum: ACOG Clinical Practice Guideline No. 3

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of primary and secondary headaches in pregnancy and postpartum.

TARGET POPULATION

Pregnant and postpartum patients with a history of or experiencing primary or new secondary headaches.

METHODS

This guideline was developed using an a priori protocol in conjunction with a writing team consisting of two specialists in obstetrics and gynecology appointed by the ACOG Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines-Obstetrics and one external subject matter expert. ACOG medical librarians completed a comprehensive literature search for primary literature within Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE. Studies that moved forward to the full-text screening stage were assessed by two authors from the writing team based on standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent quality assessment, and a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) evidence-to-decision framework was applied to interpret and translate the evidence into recommendation statements.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This Clinical Practice Guideline includes recommendations on interventions to prevent primary headache in individuals who are pregnant or attempting to become pregnant, postpartum, or breastfeeding; evaluation for symptomatic patients presenting with primary and secondary headaches during pregnancy; and treatment options for primary and secondary headaches during pregnancy and lactation. Recommendations are classified by strength and evidence quality. Ungraded Good Practice Points are included to provide guidance when a formal recommendation could not be made because of inadequate or nonexistent evidence.