ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural placement (TEP) using the conventional anatomic landmark-based technique is technically challenging, may require multiple attempts, and is associated with a high failure rate (12-40%). We hypothesized that real-time ultrasound guidance would be superior in the "first-pass" success rate of TEP, when compared with the conventional technique. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, superiority trial was conducted in a University hospital, and recruited 96 patients undergoing elective major abdominal or thoracic surgery and scheduled to receive a TEP for postoperative analgesia. Patients were randomly allocated to receive TEP using either the conventional technique (Gp-Conv, n = 48) or real-time ultrasound guidance (Gp-Usg, n = 48). The success of TEP was defined as eliciting loss of resistance technique and being able to insert the epidural catheter. The primary outcome variable was the "first-pass success rate" meaning the successful TEP at the first needle insertion without redirection or readvancement of the Tuohy needle. The secondary outcomes included the number of skin punctures, number of attempts, the overall success rate, TEP time, and total procedure time. RESULTS: The first-pass success rate of TEP was significantly higher (p = 0.002) in Gp-Usg (33/48 (68.8%); 95%CI 55.6 to 81.9) than in Gp-Conv (17/48 (35.4%); 95%CI 21.9 to 49.0). There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.12) in the overall success rate of TEP between the 2 study groups (Gp-Usg; 48/48 (100%) vs. Gp-Conv; 44/48 (91.7%); 95%CI 83.9 to 99.5). Ultrasound guidance reduced the median number of skin punctures (Gp-Usg; 1 [1, 1] vs Gp-Conv; 2 [1, 2.2], p < 0.001) and attempts at TEP (Gp-Usg; 1 [1, 2] vs Gp-Conv; 3 [1, 7.2], p < 0.001) but the procedure took longer to perform (Gp-Usg; 15.5 [14, 20] min vs Gp-Conv; 10 [7, 14] min, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that real-time ultrasound guidance is superior to a conventional anatomic landmark-based technique for first-pass success during TEP although it is achieved at the expense of a marginally longer total procedure time. Future research is warranted to evaluate the role of real-time ultrasound guidance for TEP in other groups of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trials Registry; http://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/ ; Trial ID: TCTR20200522002 , Registration date: 22/05/2020.
Subject(s)
Anatomic Landmarks , Anesthesia, Epidural , Humans , Prospective Studies , Ultrasonography , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion in anesthetized and intubated patients can be challenging, even for experienced anesthesiologists. Various techniques have been proposed to facilitate NGT insertion in these patients. This study aimed to compare the success rate and time required for NGT insertion between GlideScope™ visualization and neck flexion, with lateral neck pressure techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This randomized clinical trial was performed at a teaching hospital on 86 adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery, under relaxant general anesthesia, who required intraoperative NGT insertion. The patients were randomized into two groups, the GlideScope™ group (group G) and the neck flexion with lateral neck pressure group (group F). The success rate of the first and second attempts, duration of insertion, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: The total success rate was 79.1% in group G, compared with 76.7% in group F (P = 1). The median time required for NGT insertion was significantly longer in group G, for both first and second attempts (97 vs 42 s P < 0.001) and (70 vs 48.5 s P = 0.015), respectively. Complications were reported in 23 patients (53.5%) in group G and 13 patients (30.2%) in group F. Bleeding and kinking were the most common complications for both techniques. CONCLUSION: Using GlideScope™ visualization to facilitate NGT insertion was comparable to neck flexion with lateral neck pressure technique, in the degree of success rates of insertion. Although complications were not statistically significant between groups, neck flexion with lateral neck pressure technique was significantly less time-consuming for both first and second attempts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered: Thai Clinical Trial Registry (TCTR)20171229003 . Registered on 19 December 2017.
