Why do thoracic epidurals fail? A literature review on thoracic epidural failure and catheter confirmation.

Kamal Kumar, Fuhazia Horner, Mohamed Aly, Gopakumar S Nair, Cheng Lin
{"title":"Why do thoracic epidurals fail? A literature review on thoracic epidural failure and catheter confirmation.","authors":"Kamal Kumar, Fuhazia Horner, Mohamed Aly, Gopakumar S Nair, Cheng Lin","doi":"10.5492/wjccm.v13.i3.94157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) has been the gold standard of perioperative analgesia in various abdominal and thoracic surgeries. However, misplaced or displaced catheters, along with other factors such as technical challenges, equipment failure, and anatomic variation, lead to a high incidence of unsatisfactory analgesia. This article aims to assess the different sources of TEA failure and strategies to validate the location of thoracic epidural catheters. A literature search of PubMed, Medline, Science Direct, and Google Scholar was done. The search results were limited to randomized controlled trials. Literature suggests techniques such as electrophysiological stimulation, epidural waveform monitoring, and x-ray epidurography for identifying thoracic epidural placement, but there is no one particular superior confirmation method; clinicians are advised to select techniques that are practical and suitable for their patients and practice environment to maximize success.</p>","PeriodicalId":66959,"journal":{"name":"世界危重病急救学杂志(英文版)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11372509/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"世界危重病急救学杂志(英文版)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5492/wjccm.v13.i3.94157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) has been the gold standard of perioperative analgesia in various abdominal and thoracic surgeries. However, misplaced or displaced catheters, along with other factors such as technical challenges, equipment failure, and anatomic variation, lead to a high incidence of unsatisfactory analgesia. This article aims to assess the different sources of TEA failure and strategies to validate the location of thoracic epidural catheters. A literature search of PubMed, Medline, Science Direct, and Google Scholar was done. The search results were limited to randomized controlled trials. Literature suggests techniques such as electrophysiological stimulation, epidural waveform monitoring, and x-ray epidurography for identifying thoracic epidural placement, but there is no one particular superior confirmation method; clinicians are advised to select techniques that are practical and suitable for their patients and practice environment to maximize success.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为什么胸腔硬膜外麻醉会失败?有关胸腔硬膜外麻醉失败和导管确认的文献综述。
在各种腹部和胸部手术中,胸硬膜外麻醉(TEA)一直是围手术期镇痛的黄金标准。然而,导管错位或移位以及其他因素(如技术挑战、设备故障和解剖变异)导致镇痛效果不理想的发生率很高。本文旨在评估 TEA 失败的不同原因以及验证胸腔硬膜外导管位置的策略。我们对 PubMed、Medline、Science Direct 和 Google Scholar 进行了文献检索。搜索结果仅限于随机对照试验。文献建议采用电生理刺激、硬膜外波形监测和X光硬膜外造影等技术来确定胸腔硬膜外导管的位置,但没有一种特别优越的确认方法;建议临床医生选择实用且适合患者和实践环境的技术,以最大限度地提高成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
216
期刊最新文献
Antimicrobial and synergistic effects of lemongrass and geranium essential oils against Streptococcus mutans, Staphylococcus aureus, and Candida spp. Driving pressure: A useful tool for reducing postoperative pulmonary complications. Early clinical outcomes of two regimens of prophylactic antibiotics in cardiac surgical patients with delayed sternal closure. Impact of different intravenous bolus rates on fluid and electrolyte balance and mortality in critically ill patients. Low T3 vs low T3T4 euthyroid sick syndrome in septic shock patients: A prospective observational cohort study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1