Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2020
Feasibility of ultrasound-guided lumbar epidural access using paramedian transverse scanning with the needle in-plane: a comparison with paramedian sagittal scanning.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Confirming identification of the epidural space: a systematic review of electric stimulation, pressure waveform analysis, and ultrasound and a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy in acute pain.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023Pooled it
- Real-time Ultrasound-guided Lumbar Puncture: A Comparison of Two Techniques Using Simulation.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025Trial
- A Modified Approach Below the Lateral Arcuate Ligament to Facilitate the Subcostal Anterior Quadratus Lumborum Block.Journal of pain research · 2021Trial
- Performance of the ratio of posterior complex length to depth measured by ultrasound as a predictor of difficult spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery: a prospective cohort study.Journal of anesthesia · 2024Observational
- Dual- vs. Single-Plane Ultrasonic Scan-Assisted Positioning during Lumbar Spinal Puncture in Elderly Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Chinese Association for the Study of Pain: Experts consensus on ultrasound-guided injections for the treatment of spinal pain in China (2020 edition).World journal of clinical cases · 2021Review
- Landmark-guided versus Real-time Ultrasound-guided Combined Spinal-epidural Anesthesia Techniques: Paramedian Sagittal Oblique and Transverse Interlaminar Approach.Journal of medical ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe present study was designed to compare the feasibility of ultrasound (US)-guided lumbar epidural access using paramedian sagittal scanning (PMSS) and paramedian transverse scanning (PMTS) approaches.
methodsFifty patients undergoing surgery of the lower extremities were randomly allocated into 2 groups. The patients in PMSS group received PMSS-guided in-plane epidural access, whereas patients in PMTS group received PMTS-guided in-plane epidural access. The US visibility of neuraxial structures and of Tuohy needle during US scout scan, procedure duration, the number of attempts to access epidural space, Tuohy needle puncture depth in the epidural space, and extent of sensory block after spinal block between two groups were compared.
resultsThe US visibility of Tuohy needle and neuraxial structures was comparable between two groups. There was an overall decrease in procedure duration in the PMTS group relative to the PMSS group (360 ± 42 vs. 490 ± 38 s). The number of attempts needed to access the epidural space in PMSS group was significantly higher than in PMTS group. Distances between the epidural space and the puncture site in PMSS group and PMTS group showed a significant difference (7.13 ± 0.67 vs. 5.24 ± 0.21 cm). No significant differences in the extent of sensory block after spinal block were observed.
conclusionsWe found that PMTS approach was superior as a means of achieving epidural access relative to the PMSS approach, since PMTS approach can be conducted more quickly given shorter path of the needle and less times needed for epidural access during this procedure. CLINICAL
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry, clinical trial number ChiCTR1800015815, date of registration April 24, 2018.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.