Immediate management of inadvertent dural puncture during insertion of a labour epidural: a survey of Australian obstetric anaesthetists

Intrathecal catheter use after accidental dural puncture in obstetric patients: literature review and clinical management recommendations

If an accidental dural puncture occurs, one option is to insert a catheter and use it as an intrathecal catheter. This avoids the need for a further injection and can rapidly provide labour analgesia and anaesthesia for caesarean section. However, there are no recommendations for managing intrathecal catheters and, therefore, significant variation in clinical practice exists. Mismanagement of the intrathecal catheter can lead to increased motor block, high spinal anaesthesia, drug error, hypotension and fetal bradycardia. Care must be taken with an intrathecal catheter to adhere to strict aseptic technique, meticulous labelling, cautious administration of medications and good communication with the patient and other staff. Every institution considering the use of intrathecal catheters should establish a protocol. For labour analgesia, we recommend the use of dilute local anaesthetic agents and opioids. For caesarean section anaesthesia, gradual titration to the level of the fourth thoracic dermatome, with full monitoring, in a facility equipped to manage complications, should be performed using local anaesthetics combined with lipophilic opioids and morphine or diamorphine. Although evidence of the presence and duration of intrathecal catheters on the development of post-dural puncture headache and need for epidural blood patch is limited, we suggest considering leaving the intrathecal catheter in for 24 hours to reduce the chance of developing a post-dural puncture headache while maintaining precautions to avoid drug error and cerebrospinal fluid leakage. Injection of sterile normal saline into the intrathecal catheter may reduce post-dural puncture headache. The level of evidence for these recommendations was low.

Preliminary findings and outcomes associated with the use of a continuous spinal protocol for labor pain relief following accidental dural puncture

BACKGROUND

Various interventions have shown promise in reducing complications following accidental dural puncture. However, these have yet to be studied as a single, comprehensive protocol. The aim of this study is to compare outcomes associated with the use of a continuous spinal protocol for labor pain relief versus resiting the epidural catheter following accidental dural puncture.

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of patients managed via our continuous spinal protocol and compared this group with patients for whom the epidural was resited following accidental dural puncture during the 5-year period prior to implementing our protocol. We assessed incidence of postdural puncture headache, epidural blood patch, frequency of catheter replacement, use of pressors, verbal pain scores at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 hours following catheter placement, infection rates (meningitis/epidural abscess) and mode of delivery.

RESULTS

There were 129 women in the continuous spinal protocol group and 52 in the resited epidural group. The incidence of postdural puncture headache was lower in the continuous spinal group versus the resited epidural group (21.7% vs 67.3%, p<0.001), and the incidence of epidural blood patch was lower in the continuous spinal group versus the resited epidural group (12.4% vs 50.0%, p<0.001). Verbal pain scores were consistently lower in the continuous spinal group compared with the resited epidural group at all time intervals studied.

CONCLUSION

Patients managed via this continuous spinal protocol had significantly lower incidence of postdural puncture headache and epidural blood patch with more effective labor analgesia following accidental dural puncture.

Insertion of an intrathecal catheter following a recognised accidental dural puncture reduces the need for an epidural blood patch in parturients: an Australian retrospective study

BACKGROUND

There is no clear consensus about how best to prevent post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) following an accidental dural puncture in parturients. Our primary objective was to investigate whether the insertion of an intrathecal catheter following accidental dural puncture reduces the incidence of PDPH and therapeutic epidural blood patch.

METHODS

Anaesthetic records from January 2009 to December 2015 were reviewed retrospectively and parturients who had an accidental dural puncture and/or PDPH were identified. Data from those with a recognised dural puncture in whom an intrathecal catheter was inserted at the time of accidental dural puncture (ITC group) were compared to those without an intrathecal catheter (non-ITC group), as were outcomes of patients with an intrathecal catheter for ≥24 hours compared to <24 hours.

RESULTS

Of 94 recognised accidental dural punctures, 66 were in the ITC group (37 for ≥24 h) and 28 in the non-ITC group. In the ITC group, 22 (33.3%) required an epidural blood patch in comparison to 19 (67.9%) in the non-ITC group (P <0.01, 95% CI 12.5 to 52.0). In the ITC group, 62 (93.9%) developed PDPH in comparison to 28 (100%) in the non-ITC group (P=0.186, 95% CI -6.55 to 14.57). Intrathecal catheter insertion for ≥24 h obviated the need for an epidural blood patch in 28 (75.7%) parturients, compared to 13 (59.1%) if <24 h (P=0.184, 95% CI -7.08 to 39.72).

CONCLUSION

Inserting an intrathecal catheter after a recognised accidental dural puncture significantly reduced the need for an epidural blood patch.

Postdural Puncture Headache: An Evidence-Based Approach

Headache after dural puncture is a common complication accompanying neuraxial anesthesia. The proposed cause is loss of cerebrospinal fluid through the puncture into the epidural space. Although obstetric patients are at risk for the development of this headache because of female gender and young age, there is a difference in the obstetric population. Women who deliver by cesarean delivery have a lower incidence of headache after dural puncture compared with those who deliver vaginally. Treatment of postdural puncture headache is an epidural blood patch. Departments should develop protocols for management of accidental dural puncture, including appropriate follow-up and indications for further management.

Complications of 761 short-term intrathecal macrocatheters in obstetric patients: a retrospective review of cases over a 12-year period

BACKGROUND

A continuous spinal catheter is a reliable alternative to standard neuraxial techniques in obstetric anesthesia. Despite the potential advantages of intrathecal catheters, they remain underutilized due to fear of infection, nerve damage or post-dural puncture headache. In our tertiary care center, intrathecal catheters are either placed intentionally in high-risk obstetric patients or following inadvertent dural puncture using a 19-gauge macrocatheter passed through a 17-gauge epidural needle.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 761 intrathecal catheters placed from 2001 to 2012 was conducted. An institutional obstetric anesthesia database was used to identify patients with intrathecal catheters. Medical records were reviewed for procedural details and complications.

RESULTS

There were no serious complications, including meningitis, epidural or spinal abscess, hematoma, arachnoiditis, or cauda equina syndrome, associated with intrathecal catheters. The failure rates were 2.8% (3/108) for intentional placements and 6.1% (40/653) for placements following accidental dural puncture. The incidence of post-dural puncture headache was 41% (312/761) and the epidural blood patch rate was 31% (97/312).

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that intrathecal catheters are dependable and an option for labor analgesia and surgical anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Serious long-lasting complications are rare.

Accidental dural puncture, postdural puncture headache, intrathecal catheters, and epidural blood patch: revisiting the old nemesis

One of the controversial management options for accidental dural puncture in pregnant patients is the conversion of labor epidural analgesia to continuous spinal analgesia by threading the epidural catheter intrathecally. No clear consensus exists on how to best prevent severe headache from occurring after accidental dural puncture. To investigate whether the intrathecal placement of an epidural catheter following accidental dural puncture impacts the incidence of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) and the subsequent need for an epidural blood patch in parturients. A retrospective chart review of accidental dural puncture was performed at Hutzel Women's Hospital in Detroit, MI, USA for the years 2002-2010. Documented cases of accidental dural punctures (N = 238) were distributed into two groups based on their management: an intrathecal catheter (ITC) group in which the epidural catheter was inserted intrathecally and a non-intrathecal catheter (non-ITC) group that received the epidural catheter inserted at different levels of lumbar interspaces. The incidence of PDPH as well as the necessity for epidural blood patch was analyzed using two-tailed Fisher's exact test. In the non-ITC group, 99 (54 %) parturients developed PDPH in comparison to 20 (37 %) in the ITC [odds ratio (OR), 1.98; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.06-3.69; P = 0.03]. Fifty-seven (31 %) of 182 patients in the non-ITC group required an epidural blood patch (EBP) (data for 2 patients of 184 were missing). In contrast, 7 (13 %) of parturients in the ITC group required an EBP. The incidence of EBP was calculated in parturients who actually developed headache to be 57 of 99 (57 %) in the non-ITC group versus 7 of 20 (35 %) in the ITC group (OR, 2.52; 95 % CI, 0.92-6.68; P = 0.07). The insertion of an intrathecal catheter following accidental dural puncture decreases the incidence of PDPH but not the need for epidural blood patch in parturients.

Prevention of post-dural puncture headache in parturients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Post-dural puncture headaches (PDPHs) present an important clinical problem. We assessed methods to decrease accidental dural punctures (ADPs) and interventions to reduce PDPH following ADP. Multiple electronic databases were searched for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of parturients having labour epidurals, in which the studied intervention could plausibly affect ADP or PDPH, and the incidence of at least one of these was recorded. Forty RCTs (n = 11,536 epidural insertions) were included, studying combined spinal-epidurals (CSEs), loss of resistance medium, prophylactic epidural blood patches, needle bevel orientation, ultrasound-guided insertion, epidural morphine, Special Sprotte needles, acoustic-guided insertion, administration of cosyntropin, and continuous spinal analgesia. The RCTs for CSE, loss of resistance medium, and prophylactic epidural blood patches were meta-analysed. Five methods reduced PDPH: prophylactic epidural blood patch {four trials, median quality score = 2, risk difference = -0.48 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.88 to -0.086]}, lateral positioning of the epidural needle bevel upon insertion (one trial, quality score = 1), Special Sprotte needles [one trial, quality score = 5, risk difference = -0.44 (95% CI: -0.67 to -0.21)], epidural morphine [one trial, quality score = 4, risk difference = -0.36 (95% CI -0.59 to -0.13)], and cosyntropin [one trial, quality score = 5, risk difference = -0.36 (95% CI -0.55 to -0.16)]. Several methods potentially reduce PDPH. Special Sprotte needles, epidural morphine, and cosyntropin are thus far each supported by a single, albeit good quality trial. Prophylactic blood patches are supported by three trials, but these had flawed methodology. Mostly, trials were of limited quality, and further well-conducted, large studies are needed.

Meningeal (postdural) puncture headache, unintentional dural puncture, and the epidural blood patch: a national survey of United States practice

BACKGROUND

Meningeal (postdural) puncture headache (MPH) is a familiar iatrogenic complication. The optimal means of prevention, management, and treatment of this disorder are uncertain. The purpose of this study was to determine current practice among United States (USA) anesthesiologists regarding MPH as well as the related issues of unintentional dural puncture (UDP), the epidural blood patch (EBP), and proposed alternatives to the EBP.

METHODS

A survey form was sent as a single mailing to each practicing USA member of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine in June 2006.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed from 1024 returned survey forms (29.4% response rate). Major findings were as follows: Written institutional protocols for managing UDP and MPH are uncommon. The preferred method of immediately dealing with an UDP when providing analgesia for labor is to reattempt the epidural at another level (73.4%). When intrathecal catheters are used for labor analgesia, they are most often removed immediately after delivery (56.5%). After UDP in the obstetric setting, aggressive hydration and encouraging bed rest are the most frequently used prophylactic measures against the development of MPH. Frequently used treatment options for MPH include aggressive hydration, the EBP, oral caffeine, oral nonopioid analgesics, and bed rest. With the exception of a uniform blood volume (16-20 mL), procedural details of the EBP vary considerably among practitioners. The use of materials other than blood for epidural patch is uncommon.

CONCLUSIONS

Various measures, many poorly supported by the literature, are used prophylactically after UDP and in the treatment of MPH. Despite being nearly universally used as treatment of MPH, the EBP procedure itself remains largely nonstandardized.

Current world literature

This bibliography is compiled by clinicians from the journals listed at the end of this publication. It is based on literature entered into our database between 1 February 2008 and 31 January 2009 (articles are generally added to the database about two and a half months after publication). In addition, the bibliography contains every paper annotated by reviewers; these references were obtained from a variety of bibliographic databases and published between the beginning of the review period and the time of going to press. The bibliography has been grouped into topics that relate to the reviews in this issue.