Key result
Modified ultrasound-assisted combined spinal-epidural anesthesia boosts first-pass success by ~250% versus landmark guidance.
Why the study?
Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia is challenging in elderly patients with hip fractures due to spine degeneration and positioning limitations, necessitating evaluation of ultrasound guidance to improve success and efficacy.
Does a modified ultrasound-assisted technique improve the first-pass success rate of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia compared to landmark guidance in elderly patients with hip fractures?
RCT (n=80)
Single-blind
parallel-group
Does a modified ultrasound-assisted technique improve the first-pass success rate of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia compared to landmark guidance in elderly patients with hip fractures?
Absolute Event Rate: 70% vs 20%
p-value: p=<0.001
Modified ultrasound-assisted combined spinal-epidural anesthesia significantly increases first-pass success rates and reduces puncture time compared to landmark guidance in elderly patients with hip fractures.
Supports adoption of modified ultrasound-assisted CSE in elderly hip fracture patients; extends RCT evidence for ultrasound over landmark guidance in neuraxial anesthesia.
Background: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) anesthesia is considerably challenging for elderly patients with hip fractures due to spine degeneration and limitations in positioning. This study aimed to investigate the ability of a modified preprocedural ultrasound-guided technique to improve the success rate and efficacy of CSE anesthesia for elderly patients with hip fractures. Methods: This prospective, single-blinded, parallel-group randomized controlled trial included 80 patients (aged ≥ 65 years) who were scheduled for elective hip fracture surgery with CSE anesthesia. Patients were randomly allocated into landmark group (n = 40) or the ultrasound group (n = 40). The primary outcome was first-pass success rate. Secondary outcomes included first-attempt success rate; number of needle insertion attempts; number of needle passes; locating, puncture, and total time; level of block; procedural adverse reactions and postoperative complications; and patient satisfaction score. Patients were blinded to group allocation.Results: 80 patients completed the study and were included in the final analysis. The first-pass success rates for the landmark and ultrasound groups were 20% and 70%, respectively (P < 0.001). The first-attempt success rates in the landmark and ultrasound groups were 42.5% and 85%, respectively (P < 0.001). The median number of attempts was lower in ultrasound-assisted group (1[1,1]) than landmark-guided group (2[1,2]), P < 0.001). The median number of needle passes was lower in ultrasound group (1[1,2]) than in landmark-guided group (3[2,4], P < 0.001). The locating time (P < 0.001) and total time (P = 0.001) were longer in the ultrasound group, while puncture time was shorter (P = 0.003). No significant difference was found regarding the incidence of adverse reactions and complications. More patients in the ultrasound group had a high satisfaction score of 4–5 (P = 0.007). Interestingly, subgroup analysis demonstrated benefits for ultrasound in patients with scoliosis.Conclusions: Modified ultrasound-assisted CSE anesthesia increases first-pass and first-attempt success rates, and reduces needle insertion attempts, passes, and puncture time for elderly patients with hip fracture, especially those with scoliosis. This technique improves patient satisfaction and warrants consideration for application in clinical practice.Trial registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Register (identifier, ChiCTR1900020819; date of registration, January 20, 2019).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qu et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in hip fractures (n=80). Modified preprocedural ultrasound-guided technique vs. Landmark-guided technique was evaluated on first-pass success rate (p=<0.001). Modified ultrasound-assisted combined spinal-epidural anesthesia significantly improved the first-pass success rate compared to the landmark-guided technique (70% vs 20%, P < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: