Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparison of ultrasound-guided and traditional localisation in intraspinal anesthesia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
2023
Overview
ObjectivesThe optimal puncture technique for neuraxial anaesthesia in different populations is unclear. We sought to obtain data from randomised controlled trials comparing the impact of ultrasound-guided technology and traditional positioning technology on the success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis using study populations, interventions, intervention comparisons, outcome measures and study types.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science were searched until 31 September 2022.Eligibility criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials comparing three types of neuraxial anaesthesia: ultrasound-assisted, ultrasound real-time guidance and conventional positioning to describe which neuraxial anaesthesia modality is best for patients and to recommend the appropriate one for different populations.Data extraction and synthesisFive independent reviewers retrieved, screened and edited included studies using standardised methods. Assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration and Evidence Project tools. Network meta-analysis was performed using STATA V.15 statistical software.ResultsTwenty-two studies containing three different interventions were included. The SUCRA values of first-pass success rates for the three neuraxial anaesthesia methods were real-time guidance (82.8%), ultrasound-assisted (67.1%) and traditional positioning (0.1%). Both ultrasound techniques improved first-pass success rates compared with traditional localization, but there was no significant difference between the two. Subgroup analysis showed that the use of real-time ultrasound guidance for neuraxial anaesthesia in pregnant and patients with obesity improved first-pass success rates. Ultrasound-assisted technology can improve first-attempt success rates in older patients with abnormal lumbar spine anatomy.ConclusionCompared with conventional positioning, ultrasound guidance technology can improve the first-pass success rate of neuraxial anaesthesia, but there is no significant difference between ultrasound-assisted and real-time guidance technology. The results of subgroup analysis tell us that the most suitable neuraxial anaesthesia method is different for different groups of people.PROSPERO registration numberPROSPERO number: CRD42022376041.
