Comparison of real-time ultrasound and fluoroscopy for thoracic epidural catheter placement

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, NEC

• Registration Number: KCT0006521
• Lead Sponsor: Asan Medical Center

Brief Summary

We randomly assigned 132 patients to the allocated groups. The difference in the first pass success rate between the groups did not exceed the non-inferiority margin of 15% (ultrasound group: 66.7% vs.fluoroscopy group: 68.2%; difference -1.5%, 90% exact CI: -14.9 to 11.9). The difference in the final success rate also did not differ between the groups (98.5% vs. 100.0%; difference -1.5%, 90% exact CI: -4.0 to 1.0). The time to space marking (45.6 [34–62] vs. 59.0 [42–77] sec, p=0.004) and needling time (39.5 [28–78] vs. 112.5 [93–166] sec, p<0.001) were significantly shorter in the ultrasound group.

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Results First Posted: 1900-01-01
• Study Completion: 2022-05-12
• Last Update Posted: 28 November 2022

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 132

Inclusion Criteria

1) Patients who undergo open thoracic or abdominal surgery
2) Patients who is required thoracic epidural catheter placement
3) 20 = age <80
4) Patients who want to participate in this study and write informed consent voluntarily.

Exclusion Criteria

1) An allergy to local anesthetics and contrast dye
2) Patients who are contraindicated in nerve block such as coagulopathy, antiplatelet therapy, infection
3) Neurological or psychiatric disorders
4) Pregnancy
5) Patients who had surgery on the thoracic spine
6) Patients who had thoracic compression fracture
7) Patients who do not want to participate in this study

Study & Design

• Study Type: Interventional Study
• Study Design: Not specified