Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28383416›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Comparison of cutting and pencil-point spinal needle in spinal anesthesia regarding postdural puncture headache: A meta-analysis.

Hong Xu, Yang Liu, WenYe Song, ShunLi Kan, FeiFei Liu, Di Zhang, GuangZhi Ning, ShiQing Feng

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Vibroacoustic signatures: proof of concept for simple material characterization during needle interventions.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Postdural Puncture Headache-Risks and Current Treatment.Current pain and headache reports · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hong XuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Heping District, Tianjin, People's Republic of China.
Yang Liu
WenYe Song
ShunLi Kan
FeiFei Liu
Di Zhang
GuangZhi Ning
ShiQing Feng
Tianjin Medical University General Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPostdural puncture headache (PDPH), mainly resulting from the loss of cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), is a well-known iatrogenic complication of spinal anesthesia and diagnostic lumbar puncture. Spinal needles have been modified to minimize complications. Modifiable risk factors of PDPH mainly included needle size and needle shape. However, whether the incidence of PDPH is significantly different between cutting-point and pencil-point needles was controversial. Then we did a meta-analysis to assess the incidence of PDPH of cutting spinal needle and pencil-point spinal needle.

methodsWe included all randomly designed trials, assessing the clinical outcomes in patients given elective spinal anesthesia or diagnostic lumbar puncture with either cutting or pencil-point spinal needle as eligible studies. All selected studies and the risk of bias of them were assessed by 2 investigators. Clinical outcomes including success rates, frequency of PDPH, reported severe PDPH, and the use of epidural blood patch (EBP) were recorded as primary results. Results were evaluated using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous variables. Rev Man software (version 5.3) was used to analyze all appropriate data.

resultsTwenty-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in our study. The analysis result revealed that pencil-point spinal needle would result in lower rate of PDPH (RR 2.50; 95% CI [1.96, 3.19]; P < 0.00001) and severe PDPH (RR 3.27; 95% CI [2.15, 4.96]; P < 0.00001). Furthermore, EBP was less used in pencil-point spine needle group (RR 3.69; 95% CI [1.96, 6.95]; P < 0.0001).

conclusionsCurrent evidences suggest that pencil-point spinal needle was significantly superior compared with cutting spinal needle regarding the frequency of PDPH, PDPH severity, and the use of EBP. In view of this, we recommend the use of pencil-point spinal needle in spinal anesthesia and lumbar puncture.

Indexed as

NeedlesAnesthesia, SpinalHumansPost-Dural Puncture Headache

Identifiers

PMID28383416
PMCPMC5411200
OpenAlexW2911624805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.