Intrathecal catheter placement after inadvertent dural puncture in the obstetric population: management for labour and operative delivery. Guidelines from the Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthetists of all grades who work on a labour ward are likely to be involved in the insertion or management of an intrathecal catheter after inadvertent dural puncture at some point in their careers. Although the use of intrathecal catheters after inadvertent dural puncture in labour has increased in popularity over recent decades, robust evidence on best practice has been lacking. METHODS: The Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association set up an expert working party to review the literature. A modified Delphi approach was used to produce statements and recommendations on insertion and management of intrathecal catheters for labour and operative delivery following inadvertent dural puncture during attempted labour epidural insertion. Statements and recommendations were graded according to the US Preventive Services Task Force grading methodology. RESULTS: A total of 296 articles were identified in the initial literature search. Further screening identified 111 full text papers of relevance. A structured narrative review was produced which covered insertion of an intrathecal catheter; initial dosing; maintenance of labour analgesia; topping-up for operative delivery; safety features; complications; and recommended follow-up. The working party agreed on 17 statements and 26 recommendations. These were generally assigned a low or moderate level of certainty. The safety of mother and baby were a key priority in producing these guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: With careful management, intrathecal catheters can provide excellent labour analgesia and may also be topped-up to provide anaesthesia for caesarean or operative vaginal delivery. The use of intrathecal catheters, however, also carries the risk of significant drug errors which may result in high- or total-spinal anaesthesia, or even cardiorespiratory arrest. It is vital that all labour wards have clear guidelines on the use of these catheters, and that staff are educated as to their potential complications.

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.

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.