-
Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Dec 2016Recent research has investigated the role of gabapentin in perioperative pain relief in otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery. This review aims to identify whether... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Recent research has investigated the role of gabapentin in perioperative pain relief in otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery. This review aims to identify whether sufficient evidence exists for the routine use of gabapentin in the perioperative setting.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Google Scholar.
REVIEW METHODS
A comprehensive systematic search was performed with keywords for articles up to November 2015. The systematic review included all randomized, placebo-, and active-controlled trials investigating the role of perioperative gabapentin for pain in otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery. The studies were assessed for risk of bias and selected and reviewed by the main author. Selected trials were required to have data in the form of pain intensity scores, analgesic consumption, adverse effects, or return to normal function.
RESULTS
A total of 14 randomized controlled trials were included, of which 4 had an active control. The placebo-controlled trials included 4 for tonsillectomy, 3 for rhinology, and 3 for thyroidectomy. These studies were not suitable for meta-analysis. Trial quality involving gabapentin in tonsillectomy surgery is variable. The higher-quality studies reported significantly reduced analgesic consumption in the gabapentin groups, with the effect on pain scores less clear. There was a significant benefit, within the first 24 hours, in pain and analgesic consumption as compared with placebo favoring the gabapentin groups following rhinologic and thyroid surgery.
CONCLUSION
Overall, gabapentin appears to have a significant beneficial effect on perioperative pain relief and analgesic consumption in otorhinolaryngology-head and neck surgery procedures within the first 24 hours.
Topics: Amines; Analgesia; Analgesics; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Evidence-Based Medicine; Gabapentin; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Otolaryngology; Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures; Pain Measurement; Perioperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 27459955
DOI: 10.1177/0194599816659042 -
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine 2012Regional anesthesia has become invaluable for the treatment of pain during and after a wide range of surgical procedures. However, its benefits in the nonsurgical... (Review)
Review
Regional anesthesia has become invaluable for the treatment of pain during and after a wide range of surgical procedures. However, its benefits in the nonsurgical setting have been less well studied. Regional anesthesia is an appealing modality for critically ill patients, providing focused and sustained pain control with beneficial systemic effect profiles. Indications for regional anesthesia in this patient group are not limited to surgical and postsurgical analgesia but expand to the management of trauma-related issues, medical conditions, and painful procedures at the bedside. Patients in the critical care unit present special challenges to the regional anesthesiologist, including coagulopathies, infections, immunocompromised states, sedation- and ventilation-associated problems, and factors potentially increasing the risk for systemic toxicity. This review is intended to evaluate the role of regional anesthesia in critically ill patients, to discuss potential benefits, and to provide a summary of the published evidence on the subject.
Topics: Analgesia; Anesthesia, Conduction; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Humans; Pain; Pain Management
PubMed: 22854396
DOI: 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3182625f1a -
PloS One 2017Perioperative infusion of adenosine has been suggested to reduce the requirement for inhalation anesthetics, without causing serious adverse effects in humans. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Perioperative infusion of adenosine has been suggested to reduce the requirement for inhalation anesthetics, without causing serious adverse effects in humans. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of adenosine on postoperative analgesia.
METHODS
We retrieved articles in computerized searches of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, up to July 2016. We used adenosine, postoperative analgesia, and postoperative pain(s) as key words, with humans, RCT, and CCT as filters. Data of eligible studies were extracted, which included pain scores, cumulative opioid consumption, adverse reactions, and vital signs. Overall incidence rates, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated employing fixed-effects or random-effects models, depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials.
RESULTS
In total, 757 patients from 9 studies were included. The overall effect of adenosine on postoperative VAS/VRS scores and postoperative opioid consumption was not significantly different from that of controls (P >0.1). The occurrence of PONV and pruritus was not statistically significantly different between an adenosine and nonremifentanil subgroup (P >0.1), but the rate of PONV occurrence was greater in the remifentanil subgroup (P <0.01). Time to first postoperative analgesic requirement in the adenosine group was not significantly difference from that of the saline group (SMD = 0.07, 95%CI: -0.28 to 0.41, P = 0.71); but this occurred significantly later than with remifentanil (SMD = 1.10, 95%CI: 2.48 to 4.06, P < 0.01). Time to hospital discharge was not significantly different between the control and adenosine groups (P = 0.78). The perioperative systolic blood pressure was significantly lower in the adenosine than in the control group in the mannitol subgroup (P < 0.01). The incidence of bradycardia, transient first- degree atrioventricular block, and tachycardia was not significantly different between the adenosine and control groups (P > 0.1).
CONCLUSION
Adenosine has no analgesic effect or prophylactic effect against PONV, but reduce systolic blood pressure and heart rates. Adenosine may benefit patients with hypertension, ischemic heart disease, and tachyarrhythmia, thereby improving cardiac function.
Topics: Adenosine; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Analgesia; Analgesics, Opioid; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pain, Postoperative; Young Adult
PubMed: 28333936
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173518 -
Current Pain and Headache Reports Apr 2022Breast surgery is common and may result in significant acute as well as chronic pain. A wide range of pharmacologic interventions is available including opioids,... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Breast surgery is common and may result in significant acute as well as chronic pain. A wide range of pharmacologic interventions is available including opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, anticonvulsants, and other non-opioids with analgesic properties. We present a review of the evidence for these pharmacologic interventions. A literature search of the MEDLINE database was performed via PubMed with combined terms related to breast surgery, anesthesia, and analgesia. Articles were limited to randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, adult patients undergoing elective surgery on the breast (not including biopsy), and pharmacologic interventions only. Article titles and abstracts were screened, and risk of bias assessments were performed.
RECENT FINDINGS
The search strategy initially captured 7254 articles of which 60 articles met the full inclusion criteria. Articles were organized according to intervention: 6 opioid agonists, 14 NSAIDs and acetaminophen, 4 alpha-2 agonists, 7 NMDA receptor antagonists, 6 local anesthetics, 7 steroids, 15 anticonvulsants (one of which also discussed an NMDA antagonist), 1 antiarrhythmic, and 2 serotonin reuptake inhibitors (one of which also studied an anticonvulsant). A wide variety of medications is effective for perioperative breast analgesia, but results vary by agent and dose. The most efficacious are likely NSAIDs and anticonvulsants. Some agents may also decrease the incidence of chronic postoperative pain, including flurbiprofen, gabapentin, venlafaxine, and memantine. While many individual agents are well studied, optimal combinations of analgesic medications remain unclear.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anticonvulsants; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; N-Methylaspartate; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 35195851
DOI: 10.1007/s11916-022-01031-z -
Lasers in Medical Science Sep 2022Photobiomodulation (PBM) is reported in many studies to produce dental analgesia without producing thermal damage to tissues. This systematic review aims to assess in...
PURPOSE
Photobiomodulation (PBM) is reported in many studies to produce dental analgesia without producing thermal damage to tissues. This systematic review aims to assess in vivo studies to support the statement that PBM can produce dental analgesia.
METHOD
A systematic search strategy was constructed, and PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched. Subsequently, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, reference lists were scanned, and hand searched to identify other suitable studies.
RESULTS
Five studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not undertaken due to the heterogenous nature of the studies and data. Positive analgesia outcome was obtained in four out of five studies, and one study with no significant results was criticized for poor reporting of laser parameters, small sample size (six).
CONCLUSION
In general, all studies were criticized for poor discussion of all covariates that could have modified the results, consequently resulting in poor quality of evidence, moderate risk of bias, and poor internal validity, as well as external validity. The systematic review also discussed the potential implications of all variables to be considered for future trials, including pulsing mode, contact modes, and tooth characteristics.
Topics: Analgesia; Humans; Pain; Pain Management
PubMed: 35699807
DOI: 10.1007/s10103-022-03590-4 -
Critical Reviews in Eukaryotic Gene... 2022the aim of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive and non-pharmacological techniques on labor first-stage pain intensity.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
the aim of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive and non-pharmacological techniques on labor first-stage pain intensity. Literature databases were searched from inception to May 2021, and research was expanded through the screening of previous systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria were: (1) population: women in first stage of labor; (2) intervention: non-pharmacological, non-invasive, or minimally invasive intrapartum analgesic techniques alternative and/or complementary to pharmacological analgesia; (3) comparison: routine intrapartum care or placebos; (4) outcomes: subjective pain intensity; and (5) study design: randomized controlled trial. Risk of bias of included studies was investigated, data analysis was performed using R version 3.5.1. Effect size was calculated as difference between the control and experimental groups at posttreatment in terms of mean pain score. A total of 63 studies were included, for a total of 6146 patients (3468 in the experimental groups and 2678 in the control groups). Techniques included were massage (n = 11), birth balls (n = 5) mind-body interventions (n = 8), heat application (n = 12), music therapy (n = 9), dance therapy (n = 2), acupressure (n = 16), and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) (n = 8). The present review found significant evidence in support of the use of complementary and alternative medicine for labor analgesia, and different methods showed different impact. However, more high-quality trials are needed.
Topics: Analgesics; Female; Humans; Labor Pain; Pain Management; Pregnancy; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation
PubMed: 35381132
DOI: 10.1615/CritRevEukaryotGeneExpr.2021039986 -
International Urogynecology Journal Jun 2022Urinary incontinence (UI) is common during pregnancy and in the postpartum period. Some women appear to recover their usual urinary function but in others UI persists,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
Urinary incontinence (UI) is common during pregnancy and in the postpartum period. Some women appear to recover their usual urinary function but in others UI persists, playing an important role in women's quality of life. Even though postpartum UI seems to have a multifactorial etiology, pregnancy, vaginal delivery, birth weight and parity are recognized as risk factors. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effect of one particular potential risk factor, epidural analgesia, on the development of postpartum UI in women with vaginal delivery.
METHODS
PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus were searched for "epidural analgesia," "epidural anesthesia" or "epidural" and "urinary incontinence." All studies published until 31 July 2020 were considered. A total of 393 studies were identified, and 23 studies were included in the systematic review.
RESULTS
From the total 23 articles included in this review, 21 showed a non-significant association between epidural analgesia and postpartum UI. One study found that the risk of postpartum SUI and any type of UI was significantly, but only slightly, increased in women with epidural analgesia. Another study showed a protective effect but was lacking control for important confounders.
CONCLUSION
There appears to be no association between epidural analgesia and postpartum UI. Therefore, pregnant women should not fear epidural analgesia because of a possible increased risk of UI.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Humans; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Quality of Life; Risk Factors; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 34586440
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-021-04988-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Pain after caesarean sections (CS) can affect the well-being of the mother and her ability with her newborn. Conventional pain-relieving strategies are often underused... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pain after caesarean sections (CS) can affect the well-being of the mother and her ability with her newborn. Conventional pain-relieving strategies are often underused because of concerns about the adverse maternal and neonatal effects. Complementary alternative therapies (CAM) may offer an alternative for post-CS pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of CAM for post-caesarean pain.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, LILACS, PEDro, CAMbase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (6 September 2019), and checked the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs, comparing CAM, alone or associated with other forms of pain relief, versus other treatments or placebo or no treatment, for the treatment of post-CS pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 37 studies (3076 women) which investigated eight different CAM therapies for post-CS pain relief. There is substantial heterogeneity among the trials. We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to small numbers of women participating in the trials and to risk of bias related to lack of blinding and inadequate reporting of randomisation processes. None of the trials reported pain at six weeks after discharge. Primary outcomes were pain and adverse effects, reported per intervention below. Secondary outcomes included vital signs, rescue analgesic requirement at six weeks after discharge; all of which were poorly reported, not reported, or we are uncertain as to the effect Acupuncture or acupressure We are very uncertain if acupuncture or acupressure (versus no treatment) or acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) has any effect on pain because the quality of evidence is very low. Acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus analgesia) may reduce pain at 12 hours (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.64 to 0.07; 130 women; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.26; 2 studies; 130 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether acupuncture or acupressure (versus no treatment) or acupuncture or acupressure plus analgesia (versus analgesia) has any effect on the risk of adverse effects because the quality of evidence is very low. Aromatherapy Aromatherapy plus analgesia may reduce pain when compared with placebo plus analgesia at 12 hours (mean difference (MD) -2.63 visual analogue scale (VAS), 95% CI -3.48 to -1.77; 3 studies; 360 women; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (MD -3.38 VAS, 95% CI -3.85 to -2.91; 1 study; 200 women; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if aromatherapy plus analgesia has any effect on adverse effects (anxiety) compared with placebo plus analgesia. Electromagnetic therapy Electromagnetic therapy may reduce pain compared with placebo plus analgesia at 12 hours (MD -8.00, 95% CI -11.65 to -4.35; 1 study; 72 women; low-certainty evidence) and 24 hours (MD -13.00 VAS, 95% CI -17.13 to -8.87; 1 study; 72 women; low-certainty evidence). Massage We identified six studies (651 women), five of which were quasi-RCTs, comparing massage (foot and hand) plus analgesia versus analgesia. All the evidence relating to pain, adverse effects (anxiety), vital signs and rescue analgesic requirement was very low-certainty. Music Music plus analgesia may reduce pain when compared with placebo plus analgesia at one hour (SMD -0.84, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.46; participants = 115; studies = 2; I = 0%; low-certainty evidence), 24 hours (MD -1.79, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.91; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence), and also when compared with analgesia at one hour (MD -2.11, 95% CI -3.11 to -1.10; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence) and at 24 hours (MD -2.69, 95% CI -3.67 to -1.70; 1 study; 38 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether music plus analgesia has any effect on adverse effects (anxiety), when compared with placebo plus analgesia because the quality of evidence is very low. Reiki We are uncertain if Reiki plus analgesia compared with analgesia alone has any effect on pain, adverse effects, vital signs or rescue analgesic requirement because the quality of evidence is very low (one study, 90 women). Relaxation Relaxation may reduce pain compared with standard care at 24 hours (MD -0.53 VAS, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.01; 1 study; 60 women; low-certainty evidence). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation TENS (versus no treatment) may reduce pain at one hour (MD -2.26, 95% CI -3.35 to -1.17; 1 study; 40 women; low-certainty evidence). TENS plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) may reduce pain compared with placebo plus analgesia at one hour (SMD -1.10 VAS, 95% CI -1.37 to -0.82; 3 studies; 238 women; low-certainty evidence) and at 24 hours (MD -0.70 VAS, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.53; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). TENS plus analgesia (versus placebo plus analgesia) may reduce heart rate (MD -7.00 bpm, 95% CI -7.63 to -6.37; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) and respiratory rate (MD -1.10 brpm, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.94; 108 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if TENS plus analgesia (versus analgesia) has any effect on pain at six hours or 24 hours, or vital signs because the quality of evidence is very low (two studies, 92 women).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Some CAM therapies may help reduce post-CS pain for up to 24 hours. The evidence on adverse events is too uncertain to make any judgements on safety and we have no evidence about the longer-term effects on pain. Since pain control is the most relevant outcome for post-CS women and their clinicians, it is important that future studies of CAM for post-CS pain measure pain as a primary outcome, preferably as the proportion of participants with at least moderate (30%) or substantial (50%) pain relief. Measuring pain as a dichotomous variable would improve the certainty of evidence and it is easy to understand for non-specialists. Future trials also need to be large enough to detect effects on clinical outcomes; measure other important outcomes as listed lin this review, and use validated scales.
Topics: Acupressure; Acupuncture Analgesia; Adolescent; Adult; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Analgesics; Aromatherapy; Bias; Cesarean Section; Combined Modality Therapy; Complementary Therapies; Female; Humans; Massage; Music Therapy; Pain, Postoperative; Placebos; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Relaxation Therapy; Therapeutic Touch; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Young Adult
PubMed: 32871021
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011216.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Many women experience fear of childbirth (FOC). While fears about childbirth may be normal during pregnancy, some women experience high to severe FOC. At the extreme...
BACKGROUND
Many women experience fear of childbirth (FOC). While fears about childbirth may be normal during pregnancy, some women experience high to severe FOC. At the extreme end of the fear spectrum is tocophobia, which is considered a specific condition that may cause distress, affect well-being during pregnancy and impede the transition to parenthood. Various interventions have been trialled, which support women to reduce and manage high to severe FOC, including tocophobia.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for reducing fear of childbirth (FOC) compared with standard maternity care in pregnant women with high to severe FOC, including tocophobia.
SEARCH METHODS
In July 2020, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and reference lists of retrieved studies. We contacted researchers of trials which were registered and appeared to be ongoing.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised clinical trials which recruited pregnant women with high or severe FOC (as defined by the individual trial), for treatment intended to reduce FOC. Two review authors independently screened and selected titles and abstracts for inclusion. We excluded quasi-randomised and cross-over trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological approaches as recommended by Cochrane. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the studies for risk of bias. A third review author checked the data analysis for accuracy. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome was a reduction in FOC. Secondary outcomes were caesarean section, depression, birth preference for caesarean section or spontaneous vaginal delivery, and epidural use.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven trials with a total of 1357 participants. The interventions included psychoeducation, cognitive behavioural therapy, group discussion, peer education and art therapy. We judged four studies as high or unclear risk of bias in terms of allocation concealment; we judged three studies as high risk in terms of incomplete outcome data; and in all studies, there was a high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to concerns about risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. None of the studies reported data about women's anxiety. Participating in non-pharmacological interventions may reduce levels of fear of childbirth, as measured by the Wijma Delivery Expectancy Questionnaire (W-DEQ), but the reduction may not be clinically meaningful (mean difference (MD) -7.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.19 to -1.97; 7 studies, 828 women; low-certainty evidence). The W-DEQ tool is scored from 0 to 165 (higher score = greater fear). Non-pharmacological interventions probably reduce the number of women having a caesarean section (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89; 5 studies, 557 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between non-pharmacological interventions and usual care in depression scores measured with the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) (MD 0.09, 95% CI -1.23 to 1.40; 2 studies, 399 women; low-certainty evidence). The EPDS tool is scored from 0 to 30 (higher score = greater depression). Non-pharmacological interventions probably lead to fewer women preferring a caesarean section (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.89; 3 studies, 276 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Non-pharmacological interventions may increase epidural use compared with usual care, but the 95% CI includes the possibility of a slight reduction in epidural use (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.48; 2 studies, 380 women; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The effect of non-pharmacological interventions for women with high to severe fear of childbirth in terms of reducing fear is uncertain. Fear of childbirth, as measured by W-DEQ, may be reduced but it is not certain if this represents a meaningful clinical reduction of fear. There may be little or no difference in depression, but there may be a reduction in caesarean section delivery. Future trials should recruit adequate numbers of women and measure birth satisfaction and anxiety.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Art Therapy; Bias; Cesarean Section; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Counseling; Depression; Fear; Female; Humans; Midwifery; Parturition; Phobic Disorders; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34231203
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013321.pub2 -
Ultraschall in Der Medizin (Stuttgart,... Dec 2012The aim of this quantitative systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided neuraxial blocks in obstetric analgesia and anesthesia. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this quantitative systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided neuraxial blocks in obstetric analgesia and anesthesia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search for clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-assisted neuraxial blocks in comparison to any other technique was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL. Relative risks (RR) were calculated for dichotomous data (e. g. number of patients with vascular punctures), and mean differences (MD) were calculated for continuous outcomes (e. g. number puncture attempts), along with the respective 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI).
RESULTS
Six clinical trials (published between 2001 and 2009) including the data of 659 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Ultrasound-facilitated neuraxial blocks required a lower number of puncture attempts (MD: -0.92; 95 % CI: -1.11 to -0.74; p < 0.00001) and fewer puncture levels (MD: -0.2; 95 % CI: -0.31 to -0.1; p = 0.0002) in comparison with the more conventional loss of resistance. The success rate with the first attempt under ultrasound guidance in supposedly difficult patients was 71 % in comparison to 20 % using a conventional technique. Patients receiving ultrasound-assisted neuraxial blocks had a lower rate of procedure-related complications (post-dural puncture headache, spinal or vascular puncture).
CONCLUSION
There is some evidence that ultrasound guidance may improve the efficacy and safety of neuraxial blocks in obstetrics. If technical difficulties are anticipated, ultrasound may lower the rate of procedure-related adverse events.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 21080307
DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1245724