A novel approach to neuraxial anesthesia: application of an automated ultrasound spinal landmark identification.

BACKGROUND: Neuraxial procedures are commonly performed for therapeutic and diagnostic indications. Currently, they are typically performed via palpation-guided surface landmark. We devised a novel intelligent image processing system that identifies spinal landmarks using ultrasound images. Our primary aim was to evaluate the first attempt success rate of spinal anesthesia using landmarks obtained from the automated spinal landmark identification technique. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we recruited 100 patients who required spinal anesthesia for surgical procedures. The video from ultrasound scan image of the L3/4 interspinous space in the longitudinal view and the posterior complex in the transverse view were recorded. The demographic and clinical characteristics were collected and analyzed based on the success rates of the spinal insertion. RESULTS: Success rate (95%CI) for dural puncture at first attempt was 92.0% (85.0-95.9%). Median time to detection of posterior complex was 45.0 [IQR: 21.9, 77.3] secs. There is good correlation observed between the program-recorded depth and the clinician-measured depth to the posterior complex (r = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: The high success rate and short time taken to obtain the surface landmark with this novel automated ultrasound guided technique could be useful to clinicians to utilise ultrasound guided neuraxial techniques with confidence to identify the anatomical landmarks on the ultrasound scans. Future research would be to define the use in more complex patients during the administration of neuraxial blocks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov registry ( NCT03535155 ) on 24 May 2018.

Automated mandatory bolus versus basal infusion for maintenance of epidural analgesia in labour.

BACKGROUND: Childbirth may cause the most severe pain some women experience in their lifetime. Epidural analgesia is an effective form of pain relief during labour and is considered to be the reference standard. Traditionally epidural analgesia has been delivered as a continuous infusion via a catheter in the epidural space, with or without the ability for the patient to supplement the analgesia received by activating a programmable pump to deliver additional top-up doses, known as patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). There has been interest in delivering maintenance analgesic medication via bolus dosing (automated mandatory bolus - AMB) instead of the traditional continuous basal infusion (BI); recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that the AMB technique leads to improved analgesia and maternal satisfaction. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of automated mandatory bolus versus basal infusion for maintaining epidural analgesia in labour. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the World Health Organization International Clinial Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov on 16 January 2018. We screened the reference lists of all eligible trials and reviews. We also contacted authors of included studies in this field in order to identify unpublished research and trials still underway, and we screened the reference lists of the included articles for potentially relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all RCTs that compared the use of bolus dosing AMB with continuous BI for providing pain relief during epidural analgesia for labour in women. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were: risk of breakthrough pain with the need for anaesthetic intervention; risk of caesarean delivery; risk of instrumental delivery. Secondary outcomes included: duration of labour; local anaesthetic consumption. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 studies with a total of 1121 women. Ten studies enrolled healthy nulliparous women only and two studies enrolled healthy parous women at term as well. All studies excluded women with complicated pregnancies. There were variations in the technique of initiation of epidural analgesia. Seven studies utilized the combined spinal epidural (CSE) technique, and the other five studies only placed an epidural catheter without any intrathecal injection. Seven studies utilized ropivacaine: six with fentanyl and one with sufentanil. Two studies used levobupivacaine: one with sufentanil and one with fentanyl. Three used bupivacaine with or without fentanyl. The overall risk of bias of the studies was low.AMB probably reduces the risk of breakthrough pain compared with BI for maintaining epidural analgesia for labour (from 33% to 20%; risk ratio (RR) 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.92, 10 studies, 797 women, moderate-certainty evidence). AMB may make little or no difference to the risk of caesarean delivery compared to BI (15% and 16% respectively; RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.21, 11 studies, 1079 women, low-certainty evidence).AMB may make little or no difference in the risk of instrumental delivery compared to BI (12% and 9% respectively; RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.06, 11 studies, 1079 women, low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the mean duration of labour with AMB compared to BI (mean difference (MD) -10.38 min; 95% CI -26.73 to 5.96, 11 studies, 1079 women, moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in the hourly consumption of local anaesthetic with AMB compared to BI for maintaining epidural analgesia during labour (MD -1.08 mg/h; 95% CI -1.78 to -0.38, 12 studies, 1121 women, moderate-certainty evidence). Five out of seven studies reported an increase in maternal satisfaction with AMB compared to BI for maintaining epidural analgesia for labour; however, we did not pool these data due to their ordinal nature. Seven studies reported Apgar scores, though there was significant heterogeneity in reporting. None of the studies showed any significant difference between Apgar scores between groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is predominantly moderate-certainty evidence that AMB is similar to BI for maintaining epidural analgesia for labour for all measured outcomes and may have the benefit of decreasing the risk of breakthrough pain and improving maternal satisfaction while decreasing the amount of local anaesthetic needed.

Massive Hemoptysis Through Endotracheal Tube During Emergency Cesarean Delivery: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Severe pulmonary hemorrhage occurred through the endotracheal tube during an emergency cesarean delivery. Intubation trauma was excluded with fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Episodes of hemoptysis continued for 48 hours. The patient was subsequently diagnosed with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage because of systemic lupus erythematosus. The diagnostic workup, successful management, and literature review are presented.

Impact of Anesthetic Predictors on Postpartum Hospital Length of Stay and Adverse Events Following Cesarean Delivery: A Retrospective Study in 840 Consecutive Parturients.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean deliveries are increasing, and associated postoperative adverse events are extending hospitalizations. The aims of the present study were to analyze the role of anesthestic predictors during cesarean delivery on the incidences of extended postpartum hospital length of stay (>4 postoperative days) and adverse events. METHODS: The medical records of 840 consecutive patients who underwent cesarean delivery during a 1-year period were abstracted. Previously reported anesthetic predictors underwent recursive partitioning with 5-fold cross-validation and with LogWorth values ≥2.0 statistically significant at the <0.01 level. RESULTS: In this study of 840 cesarean delivery patients, 120 parturients (14.3%; confidence interval 12.1%-16.8%) experienced extended postpartum hospital length of stay (>4 hospital days). One anesthetic predictor associated with extended postpartum hospital length of stay was type of anesthetic technique: a 25.6% incidence in parturients receiving general or epidural anesthesia compared to a 9.6% incidence in parturients receiving either spinal or combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (LogWorth value of 7.3). When the amount of intravenous fluids intraoperatively administered to Americian Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status III and IV parturients was ≥2,000 mL, the incidence of extended postpartum hospital length of stay decreased from a baseline value of 30.0% to 17.3% (LogWorth value of 2.8). The incidence of adverse events ranged from 0%-5.0%. All regional anesthetic techniques were significantly associated with a decreased incidence of adverse events: 0.7% with spinal anesthesia, 1.9% with epidural anesthesia, and 3.2% with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia when compared to the 51.4% incidence associated with general anesthesia (LogWorth value of 4.0). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that type of anesthetic technique and amount of intraoperative fluids administered during cesarean delivery have important effects on the incidences of extended postpartum hospital length of stay and adverse events following cesarean delivery.