Trial reportMedicine2020
Comparison of Whitacre needle and Chiba needle on the incidence of intravascular injection during caudal epidural injections: A single-blind, randomized clinical consort study.
Trial report in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractCaudal epidural injection (CEI) is effective for lumbar spinal pain. However, accidental intravascular injection reduces therapeutic efficacy of CEI and leads to fatal complications such as hematoma, and neurologic deficit. Whitacre needle has been reported to be effective for reducing intravascular injection during transforaminal epidural injection, compared with Quincke needle. The bevel of Chiba needle is shorter than that of Quincke needle. In this study we compared Whitacre needle and Chiba needle on incidence of intravascular injection during CEI.This was a single-blind, randomized clinical consort study. After institutional Review Board approval, a total of 164 patients underwent CEI were randomly allocated to one of 2 group (Whitacre needle or Chiba needle group). Intravascular injection was assessed with real-time fluoroscopy. In addition, total procedure time was measured. Data were compared between groups, and P < .05 was consideredstatistically significant.There were no differences between groups in terms of patient demographic and clinical characteristics. There was no significant difference on incidence of intravascular injection between Whitacre and Chiba needle group (11% vs 19.5%, P = .192). However, the procedure time is significantly longer in the Whitacre than Chiba needle group (172.8 ± 53.8 sec vs 147.1 ± 61.1 sec, P = .005).Based on current study, our results indicated that Whitacre needle was not effective to decrease the incidence of intravascular injection during CEI, compared to Chiba needle.
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.