Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument

Background. The occurrence of false losses of resistance may be one of the reasons for inadequate or failed epidural block. A CompuFlo® epidural instrument has been introduced to measure the pressure of human tissues in real time at the orifice of a needle and has been used as a tool to identify the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pasquale Vaira, Michela Camorcia, Tiziana Palladino, Matteo Velardo, Giorgio Capogna
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2019-01-01
Series:Anesthesiology Research and Practice
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/5185901
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832562037828354048
author Pasquale Vaira
Michela Camorcia
Tiziana Palladino
Matteo Velardo
Giorgio Capogna
author_facet Pasquale Vaira
Michela Camorcia
Tiziana Palladino
Matteo Velardo
Giorgio Capogna
author_sort Pasquale Vaira
collection DOAJ
description Background. The occurrence of false losses of resistance may be one of the reasons for inadequate or failed epidural block. A CompuFlo® epidural instrument has been introduced to measure the pressure of human tissues in real time at the orifice of a needle and has been used as a tool to identify the epidural space. The aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity and the specificity of the ability of CompuFlo® to differentiate the false loss of resistance from the true loss of resistance encountered during the epidural space identification procedure. Method. We performed epidural block with the CompuFlo® epidural instrument in 120 healthy women who requested labor epidural analgesia. The epidural needle was considered to have reached the epidural space when an increase in pressure (accompanied by an increase in the pitch of the audible tone) was followed by a sudden and sustained drop in pressure for more than 5 seconds accompanied by a sudden decrease in the pitch of the audible tone, resulting in the formation of a low and stable pressure plateau. We evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the ability of CompuFlo® recordings to correctly identify the true LOR from the false LOR. Results. The drop in pressure associated with the epidural space identification was significantly greater than that recorded after the false loss of resistance (73% vs 33%) (P=0.000001). The sensitivity was 0.83, and the AUC was 0.82. Discussion. We have confirmed the ability of CompuFlo® to differentiate the false loss of resistance from the true loss of resistance and established its specificity and sensitivity. Conclusion. An easier identification of dubious losses of resistance during the epidural procedure is essential to reduce the number of epidural attempts and/or needle reinsertions with the potential of a reduced risk of accidental dural puncture especially in difficult cases or when the procedure is performed by trainees.
format Article
id doaj-art-2cf4b43d1e8149c49dbb7f665c440fc7
institution Kabale University
issn 1687-6962
1687-6970
language English
publishDate 2019-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Anesthesiology Research and Practice
spelling doaj-art-2cf4b43d1e8149c49dbb7f665c440fc72025-02-03T01:23:33ZengWileyAnesthesiology Research and Practice1687-69621687-69702019-01-01201910.1155/2019/51859015185901Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural InstrumentPasquale Vaira0Michela Camorcia1Tiziana Palladino2Matteo Velardo3Giorgio Capogna4Department of Anesthesiology, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, (FG), ItalyDepartment of Anesthesiology, CdC Città di Roma, Rome, ItalyDepartment of Anesthesiology, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, (FG), ItalyEuropean School of Obstetric Anesthesia, EESOA, Rome, ItalyEuropean School of Obstetric Anesthesia, EESOA, Rome, ItalyBackground. The occurrence of false losses of resistance may be one of the reasons for inadequate or failed epidural block. A CompuFlo® epidural instrument has been introduced to measure the pressure of human tissues in real time at the orifice of a needle and has been used as a tool to identify the epidural space. The aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity and the specificity of the ability of CompuFlo® to differentiate the false loss of resistance from the true loss of resistance encountered during the epidural space identification procedure. Method. We performed epidural block with the CompuFlo® epidural instrument in 120 healthy women who requested labor epidural analgesia. The epidural needle was considered to have reached the epidural space when an increase in pressure (accompanied by an increase in the pitch of the audible tone) was followed by a sudden and sustained drop in pressure for more than 5 seconds accompanied by a sudden decrease in the pitch of the audible tone, resulting in the formation of a low and stable pressure plateau. We evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the ability of CompuFlo® recordings to correctly identify the true LOR from the false LOR. Results. The drop in pressure associated with the epidural space identification was significantly greater than that recorded after the false loss of resistance (73% vs 33%) (P=0.000001). The sensitivity was 0.83, and the AUC was 0.82. Discussion. We have confirmed the ability of CompuFlo® to differentiate the false loss of resistance from the true loss of resistance and established its specificity and sensitivity. Conclusion. An easier identification of dubious losses of resistance during the epidural procedure is essential to reduce the number of epidural attempts and/or needle reinsertions with the potential of a reduced risk of accidental dural puncture especially in difficult cases or when the procedure is performed by trainees.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/5185901
spellingShingle Pasquale Vaira
Michela Camorcia
Tiziana Palladino
Matteo Velardo
Giorgio Capogna
Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument
Anesthesiology Research and Practice
title Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument
title_full Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument
title_fullStr Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument
title_full_unstemmed Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument
title_short Differentiating False Loss of Resistance from True Loss of Resistance While Performing the Epidural Block with the CompuFlo® Epidural Instrument
title_sort differentiating false loss of resistance from true loss of resistance while performing the epidural block with the compuflo r epidural instrument
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/5185901
work_keys_str_mv AT pasqualevaira differentiatingfalselossofresistancefromtruelossofresistancewhileperformingtheepiduralblockwiththecompufloepiduralinstrument
AT michelacamorcia differentiatingfalselossofresistancefromtruelossofresistancewhileperformingtheepiduralblockwiththecompufloepiduralinstrument
AT tizianapalladino differentiatingfalselossofresistancefromtruelossofresistancewhileperformingtheepiduralblockwiththecompufloepiduralinstrument
AT matteovelardo differentiatingfalselossofresistancefromtruelossofresistancewhileperformingtheepiduralblockwiththecompufloepiduralinstrument
AT giorgiocapogna differentiatingfalselossofresistancefromtruelossofresistancewhileperformingtheepiduralblockwiththecompufloepiduralinstrument