Abstract/Text
This article reviews historical aspects and the following complications of lumbar puncture: cerebral and spinal herniation, postdural puncture headache, cranial neuropathies, nerve root irritation, low back pain, stylet associated problems, infections, and bleeding complications. The incidence of postdural puncture headache can be greatly reduced by pointing the face of the bevel in the direction of the patient's side, replacing the stylet and rotating the needle 90;dg before withdrawing the needle, and using the Sprotte atraumatic needle, especially in high risk patients.
Abstract/Text
OBJECTIVE: To review the current research and formulate a rational approach to the cause, prevention and treatment of postdural puncture headache (PDPH).
DATA SOURCES: Articles published from January 1980 to April 1992 were obtained through a search of MEDLINE and Index Medicus. Key reference articles published before 1980 were also reviewed.
STUDY SELECTION: All pertinent studies were included and critically analysed.
DATA SYNTHESIS: PDPH occurs when a slow leak of cerebrospinal fluid leads to contraction of the subarachnoid space and compensatory expansion of the pain-sensitive intracerebral veins. Female sex and an age between 20 and 40 years have been shown to be independent risk factors for PDPH, but pregnancy has not. The rate of PDPH is directly proportional to the diameter of the needle used and also depends on the design of the needle tip. Prophylactic epidural blood patching or saline infusion after dural puncture can decrease the incidence of PDPH, but both are invasive procedures. Intravenous caffeine sodium benzoate therapy effectively relieves PDPH, but the headache may recur. An epidural blood patch is an invasive but effective, permanent treatment for PDPH in most cases; resistant cases may respond to epidural saline infusion.
CONCLUSION: The rate of PDPH after lumbar puncture can be minimized through strict attention to technique and the employment of a 25-gauge needle with the bevel parallel to the dural fibres. A reliable diagnosis and stepwise approach to treatment will minimize complications.
Abstract/Text
CONTEXT: Diagnostic lumbar punctures (LPs), commonly used to rule out meningitis, are associated with adverse events.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence about diagnostic LP techniques that may decrease the risk of adverse events and the evidence about test accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis in adult patients with suspected bacterial meningitis.
DATA SOURCES: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (using Ovid and PubMed) from 1966 to January 2006 and EMBASE from 1980 to January 2006 without language restrictions to identify relevant studies and identified others from the bibliographies of retrieved articles.
STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized trials of patients aged 18 years or older undergoing interventions to facilitate a successful diagnostic LP or to potentially reduce adverse events. Studies assessing the accuracy of biochemical analysis of the CSF for possible bacterial meningitis were also identified.
DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently appraised study quality and extracted relevant data. For studies of the LP technique, data on the intervention and the outcome were extracted. For studies of the laboratory diagnosis of bacterial meningitis, data on the reference standard and test accuracy were extracted.
DATA SYNTHESIS: We found 15 randomized trials. A random-effects model was used for quantitative synthesis. Five studies of 587 patients compared atraumatic needles with standard needles and found a nonsignificant decrease in the odds of headache with an atraumatic needle (absolute risk reduction [ARR], 12.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.72% to 26.2%). Reinsertion of the stylet before needle removal decreased the risk of headache (ARR, 11.3%; 95% CI, 6.50%-16.2%). The combined results from 4 studies of 717 patients showed a nonsignificant decrease in headache in patients who were mobilized after LP (ARR, 2.9%; 95% CI, -3.4 to 9.3%). Four studies on the accuracy of biochemical analysis of CSF in patients with suspected meningitis met inclusion criteria. A CSF-blood glucose ratio of 0.4 or less (likelihood ratio [LR], 18; 95% CI, 12-27]), CSF white blood cell count of 500/muL or higher (LR, 15; 95% CI, 10-22), and CSF lactate level of 31.53 mg/dL or more (> or =3.5 mmol/L; LR, 21; 95% CI, 14-32) accurately diagnosed bacterial meningitis.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that small-gauge, atraumatic needles may decrease the risk of headache after diagnostic LP. Reinsertion of the stylet before needle removal should occur and patients do not require bed rest after the procedure. Future research should focus on evaluating interventions to optimize the success of a diagnostic LP and to enhance training in procedural skills.
Abstract/Text
The post-lumbar puncture syndrome (PLPS) can best be explained by prolonged spinal fluid leakage owing to delayed closure of a dural defect. Its incidence after spinal anaesthesia is much lower than after diagnostic lumbar puncture (LP). This difference could be caused by a strand of arachnoid, which might enter the needle with the outflowing cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) during diagnostic LP and upon removal of the needle be threaded back through the dura to produce prolonged CSF leakage. To find a technique that further reduces the incidence of PLPS, this hypothesis was tested by evaluating the effect that reinserting the stylet before removing the needle had on the incidence of PLPS. By reinserting the stylet to the tip of the needle, the hypothesized strand would be pushed out, thereby reducing the frequency of PLPS. Sprotte's "atraumatic needle" (21 gauge) was used for LP. A total of 600 patients participated in the prospective study. They were randomized into two groups and questioned about their complaints every day for up to 7 days after the LP. All LPs were performed by two experienced neurologists (T.B., M.S.). In 300 patients, the stylet was reinserted to the tip of the eedle; in the other 300 it was not reinserted. Whereas 49 of the 300 patients without reinsertion developed PLPS, only 15 of the 300 patients with reinsertion did. This significant difference (16.3 vs 5.0%, P < 0.005, chi square test) supports our hypothesis. On the basis of our results, we recommend reinserting the stylet before removing the needle in order to reduce the incidence of PLPS.
Abstract/Text
Post-lumbar puncture headache is a frequent clinical problem. Needle design is expected to reduce post-puncture headache. In this study, we compared two different lumbar puncture needle designs in diagnostic lumbar puncture and analysed post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) and social and economical harm associated with the diagnostic lumbar puncture procedure. This prospective, controlled study consisted of 80 consecutive adult patients requiring elective diagnostic lumbar puncture due to various neurological symptoms. Lumbar puncture was completed either with Spinocan 22 G sharp bevel needle or Whitacre 22G pencil point needle. Patients were asked about previous headache symptoms and pain provoked by puncture. One week after the lumbar puncture all patients were interviewed by telephone and occurrence and type of headache, headache intensity, medication and frequency of impairment in activities of daily living were asked. Need for epidural blood patch was also recorded. Thirty-three of 78 (42%) patients experienced headache after diagnostic lumbar puncture and in 26 (33%) the headache could be classified as PDPH. There were no statistically significant differences between needle types in the frequency of common headache, PDPH, puncture pain intensity, need for epidural blood patch or sick leave. Also, there were no other complications except local back pain or headache. In this study, the needle design did not affect the frequency of PDPH. Also, PDPH was common, occurring in 33% cases and caused a considerable amount of disturbance in daily activities. Seeking help for this condition was insufficient and only part of these PDPH patients were treated with epidural blood patch.
Abstract/Text
BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 8, 2011, on 'Drug therapy for treating post-dural puncture headache'.Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is the most common complication of lumbar puncture, an invasive procedure frequently performed in the emergency room. Numerous pharmaceutical drugs have been proposed to treat PDPH but there are still some uncertainties about their clinical effectiveness.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of drugs for treating PDPH in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS: The searches included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE and MEDLINE in Process (from 1950 to 29 July 2014), EMBASE (from 1980 to 29 July 2014) and CINAHL (from 1982 to July 2014). There were no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of any pharmacological drug used for treating PDPH. Outcome measures considered for this review were: PDPH persistence of any severity at follow-up (primary outcome), daily activity limited by headache, conservative supplementary therapeutic option offered, epidural blood patch performed, change in pain severity scores, improvements in pain severity scores, number of days participants stay in hospital, any possible adverse events and missing data.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We estimated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. We calculated a 95% confidence interval (CI) for each RR and MD. We did not undertake meta-analysis because the included studies assessed different sorts of drugs or different outcomes. We performed an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 small RCTs (479 participants) in this review (at least 274 participants were women, with 118 parturients after a lumbar puncture for regional anaesthesia). In the original version of this Cochrane review, only seven small RCTs (200 participants) were included. Pharmacological drugs assessed were oral and intravenous caffeine, subcutaneous sumatriptan, oral gabapentin, oral pregabalin, oral theophylline, intravenous hydrocortisone, intravenous cosyntropin and intramuscular adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH).Two RCTs reported data for PDPH persistence of any severity at follow-up (primary outcome). Caffeine reduced the number of participants with PDPH at one to two hours when compared to placebo. Treatment with caffeine also decreased the need for a conservative supplementary therapeutic option.Treatment with gabapentin resulted in better visual analogue scale (VAS) scores after one, two, three and four days when compared with placebo and also when compared with ergotamine plus caffeine at two, three and four days. Treatment with hydrocortisone plus conventional treatment showed better VAS scores at six, 24 and 48 hours when compared with conventional treatment alone and also when compared with placebo. Treatment with theophylline showed better VAS scores compared with acetaminophen at two, six and 12 hours and also compared with conservative treatment at eight, 16 and 24 hours. Theophylline also showed a lower mean "sum of pain" when compared with placebo. Sumatriptan and ACTH did not show any relevant effect for this outcome.Theophylline resulted in a higher proportion of participants reporting an improvement in pain scores when compared with conservative treatment.There were no clinically significant drug adverse events.The rest of the outcomes were not reported by the included RCTs or did not show any relevant effect.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: None of the new included studies have provided additional information to change the conclusions of the last published version of the original Cochrane review. Caffeine has shown effectiveness for treating PDPH, decreasing the proportion of participants with PDPH persistence and those requiring supplementary interventions, when compared with placebo. Gabapentin, hydrocortisone and theophylline have been shown to decrease pain severity scores. Theophylline has also been shown to increase the proportion of participants that report an improvement in pain scores when compared with conventional treatment.There is a lack of conclusive evidence for the other drugs assessed (sumatriptan, adrenocorticotropic hormone, pregabalin and cosyntropin).These conclusions should be interpreted with caution, due to the lack of information to allow correct appraisal of risk of bias, the small sample sizes of the studies and also their limited generalisability, as nearly half of the participants were postpartum women in their 30s.
Abstract/Text
BACKGROUND: The most common complication of lumbar puncture (LP) occurring in over thirty percent of patients is headache. The position after lumbar puncture, needle type and size, and volume of the extracted cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) have been evaluated as contributory factors in occurrence of post lumbar puncture headache (PLPH), but the position before lumbar puncture has not been evaluated.
METHODS: The occurrence of post lumbar puncture headache was evaluated in 125 patients undergoing lumbar puncture, divided randomly into sitting and lateral decubitus groups in the following five days. Chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Thirty eight patients (30.4%) reported headache after lumbar puncture in the two groups, and post lumbar puncture headache was significantly lower in the lateral decubitus position (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference between genders in the post lumbar puncture headache occurrence (p = 0.767).
CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar puncture in sitting position could produce more post lumbar puncture headache in comparison with lateral decubitus position.
