Comparison of landmark and real-time ultrasound-guided epidural catheter placement in the pediatric population: a prospective randomized comparative trial

Ultrasound-based Accuro system versus traditional palpation technique for neuraxial anaesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

This review evaluates the efficacy and safety of Accuro, a handheld ultrasound device, compared to the palpation technique for neuraxial anaesthesia. Accuro provides real-time imaging guidance, potentially improving accuracy and efficiency.

METHODS

A comprehensive search across six electronic databases identified randomised clinical trials comparing Accuro with palpation for neuraxial anaesthesia. Risk ratios or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Bias risk was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

Five studies (n=369) met the inclusion criteria. Accuro showed a favourable risk ratio for first insertion success (1.44 [95% CI [1.01, 2.05], p=0.05]). It significantly reduced needle skin passes (MD -0.63; 95% CI [-1.05, -0.21]; p<0.01), but not needle redirection (MD -1.31; 95% CI [-2.71, 0.11]; p=0.07). Procedure time was shorter in palpation (MD 127.82; 95% CI [8.68, -246.97]; p=0.04). Four studies had a low risk of bias; one had some concerns.

CONCLUSION

Accuro can potentially improve success rates and reduce skin passes in neuraxial anaesthesia. Further trials with larger samples are needed, especially in patients with anticipated difficulties.

Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The optimal puncture technique for neuraxial anaesthesia in different populations is unclear. We sought to obtain data from randomised controlled trials comparing the impact of ultrasound-guided technology and traditional positioning technology on the success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis using study populations, interventions, intervention comparisons, outcome measures and study types.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science were searched until 31 September 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing three types of neuraxial anaesthesia: ultrasound-assisted, ultrasound real-time guidance and conventional positioning to describe which neuraxial anaesthesia modality is best for patients and to recommend the appropriate one for different populations.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Five independent reviewers retrieved, screened and edited included studies using standardised methods. Assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA V.15 statistical software.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies containing three different interventions were included. The SUCRA values of first-pass success rates for the three neuraxial anaesthesia methods were real-time guidance (82.8%), ultrasound-assisted (67.1%) and traditional positioning (0.1%). Both ultrasound techniques improved first-pass success rates compared with traditional localization, but there was no significant difference between the two. Subgroup analysis showed that the use of real-time ultrasound guidance for neuraxial anaesthesia in pregnant and patients with obesity improved first-pass success rates. Ultrasound-assisted technology can improve first-attempt success rates in older patients with abnormal lumbar spine anatomy.

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional positioning, ultrasound guidance technology can improve the first-pass success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia, but there is no significant difference between ultrasound-assisted and real-time guidance technology. The results of subgroup analysis tell us that the most suitable neuraxial anaesthesia method is different for different groups of people.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO number: CRD42022376041.

Multimodality Imaging Assessment of Desmoid Tumors: The Great Mime in the Era of Multidisciplinary Teams

Desmoid tumors (DTs), also known as desmoid fibromatosis or aggressive fibromatosis, are rare, locally invasive, non-metastatic soft tissue tumors. Although histological results represent the gold standard diagnosis, imaging represents the fundamental tool for the diagnosis of these tumors. Although histological analysis represents the gold standard for diagnosis, imaging represents the fundamental tool for the diagnosis of these tumors. DTs represent a challenge for the radiologist, being able to mimic different pathological conditions. A proper diagnosis is required to establish an adequate therapeutic approach. Multimodality imaging, including ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), should be preferred. Different imaging techniques can also guide minimally invasive treatments and monitor their effectiveness. The purpose of this review is to describe the state-of-the-art multidisciplinary imaging of DTs; and its role in patient management.