MedPath

What Technique for Caudal Block in Children: Conventional or Ultrasound-guided

Not Applicable
Recruiting
Conditions
Compare Ultrasound-guided Caudal Block to the Conventional Technique Based on Anatomical Landmarks
Registration Number
NCT06655571
Lead Sponsor
Tunis University
Brief Summary

The goal of our study is to compare ultrasound-guided caudal block to the conventional technique based on anatomical landmarks.

Detailed Description

The primary endpoint was the success rate of each technique. We also collected the time taken for each technique, the number of punctures, and the incidence of complications (subcutaneous infiltration, intravascular injection).

Children were randomized to receive a caudal block based on anatomical landmarks (group C) or ultrasound-guided (group E) at a dose of 1 ml/kg of 0.25% bupivacaine, not exceeding 20 ml.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
RECRUITING
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
94
Inclusion Criteria
  • children aged between 6 months and 6 years, ASA 1 , underwent elective surgery
Exclusion Criteria
  • severe systemic diseases, previous neurological or spinal disorders, coagulation abnormalities, allergies toward LAs, local infection at the block site

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Success rate of blockduring surgery

A successful block was defined as an absence of significant motor movements following surgical induction or aberrations in the heart or respiratory rates

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
block performing timeperioperative

the period between anatomical structures identification and termination of LA administration

number of needle punctureduring procedure
complication ratesduring procedure

Blood aspiration Subcutaneous bulging Bone contact Dural puncture Local anesthetic toxicity

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Bechir Hamza hospital

🇹🇳

Tunis, Tunisia

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath