• Users Online: 172
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 141-145

Acoustic puncture assist device versus ultrasound imaging technique for thoracic epidural space identification in obese patients


Anesthesia Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Yasser M.M Osman
Anesthesia Department, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/roaic.roaic_49_17

Rights and Permissions

Introduction Newer techniques have been used lately such as the ultrasonography (US) and the acoustic puncture assist device (APAD) to identify the epidural space (EDS). The difference between using these techniques in obese patients has not been studied enough yet. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the ease of placement of thoracic epidural catheter in obese patients using either APAD versus US imaging assisted technique. The secondary aim is to compare the incidence of complications between both techniques. Patients and methods The institutional review board at the University of Alexandria approved the study protocol. One hundred obese patients (BMI >30 kg/m2) were randomly enrolled into one of the two study groups. The placement of thoracic epidural catheter was done using an US-assisted technique in cases of group I, while epidural catheter was inserted into the thoracic EDS using APAD in group II patients. Results First attempt success rate for EDS localization was higher in group II (APAD) as compared with group I (US group) (83 vs. 79%), but there was no significant statistical difference between both groups (P=0.461). Mean time for EDS localization was statistically significantly longer in group I (US-guided group) than in group II (APAD) (78.44±23.6 vs. 58.78±22.2 s; P<0.00001). Patients of group II were statistically more comfortable during the procedure (P=0.001). The mean visual analogue scale score for discomfort postprocedure was 2.5±1.18 in cases of group I versus 1.74±0.85 in patients of group II. There was no statistical difference as regards the complication in both groups. Conclusion The previous findings of the shorter time of EDS localization and more patient comfort in APAD-guided epidural analgesia than those of US-guided technique has ended in the conclusion that the use of APAD for thoracic epidural anesthesia in obese patients is a better choice than using US.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed139    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded25    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal