JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by de Medicis, E. Articles by Laroche, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by de Medicis, E. Articles by Laroche, L. Related Collections Anesthetic Techniques Regional Anesthesia Pain

---

REGIONAL ANESTHESIA

A Prospective Comparative Study of Two Indirect Methods for Confirming the Localization of an Epidural Catheter for Postoperative Analgesia

Departement d’Anesthesiologie Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Etienne de Medicis, MD, MSc, Departement d’Anesthesiologie Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke 3001, 12 E. Avenue Nord Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada J1H 5N4. Address e-mail to estria1{at}globetrotter.net.

We prospectively evaluated, in randomized order, 2 indirect methods of confirming the localization of an epidural catheter for postoperative analgesia in 218 surgical patients: epidural stimulation test (EST) and epidural pressure waveform analysis (EPWA). The epidural space was localized by using a loss of resistance technique. All catheters were inserted 5 cm into the epidural space and primed with 5 mL of 0.9% normal saline. There were no differences between the methods: the positive predictive value and specificity were high (100% in both groups), but the sensitivity was moderate (80% for EST and 81% for EPWA) and the negative predictive value was low (16% for EST and 17% for EPWA). Combining both methods yielded better sensitivity (97%) and negative predictive value (57%) (P < 0.001). The sensitivity of EST was increased to 87% (P < 0.05) if sensory response was included as well as motor response for stimulation less than 10 mA. We suggest the inclusion of sensory response in the appropriate dermatome at a current <10 mA as a criterion for adequate epidural catheter localization for EST testing. EPWA sensitivity was significantly better with older patients: 94% for patients older than 80 yr compared with 63% for patients younger than 40, 73% for patients 40 to 60, and 85% for patients aged 60 to 80 yr (P = 0.03). We conclude that the two tests are comparable for confirming catheter placement.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. G. Forster, T. T. Niemi, M. T. Salmenpera, S. Ikonen, and P. H. Rosenberg An Evaluation of the Epidural Catheter Position by Epidural Nerve Stimulation in Conjunction with Continuous Epidural Analgesia in Adult Surgical Patients Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2009; 108(1): 351 - 358. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. C. H. Tsui Epidural stimulation test criteria. Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2006; 103(3): 775 - 776. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. de Medicis, R. Martin, and J.-P. Tetrault Epidural Stimulation Test Criteria Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2006; 103(3): 776 - 776. [Full Text] [PDF]

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999