Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34168495›Full record

Trial reportLocal and regional anesthesia2021

Analysis of Epidural Waveform to Determine Correct Epidural Catheter Placement After CSE Labor Analgesia.

Alessandra Coccoluto, Giorgio Capogna, Michela Camorcia, Mark Hochman, Matteo Velardo

Open access · goldAbstract readCase ReportsClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Local and regional anesthesia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Reply to Capogna et al.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022
    Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Alessandra CoccolutoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Policlinico Casilino, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1643-7886
Giorgio CapognaEESOA, European School of Obstetric Anesthesia, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2298-8905
Michela CamorciaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Città di Roma Hospital, Roma, Italy.
Mark HochmanMilestone Scientific Inc, Roseland, NJ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5834-6421
Matteo VelardoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Policlinico Casilino, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9832-6276
Policlinico Casilino · ITCasa di Cura Città di Roma · ITEuropean School of Oncology · ITMilestone Scientific (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe epidural pressure is pulsatile and synchronized with arterial pulsations. Monitoring the epidural waveform has been suggested as a technique to reliably confirm the appropriate localization of the epidural catheter.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Computer Controlled Drug Delivery System with continuous pressure and waveform sensing technology (CCDDS) (CompuFlo

methodsWe enrolled 40 consecutive healthy patients undergoing CSE labor analgesia with successful analgesia. All the cases in which pulsatile waveforms in synchrony with heart rate were detected were considered to be true positives; all the cases in which there was the absence of pulsatile waves were followed up. If these patients had to eventually relocate or manipulate the epidural catheter, they were considered to be true negative. If the absence of pulse waves was observed in the presence of successful analgesia during labor, the patients were considered to be false negatives.

resultsPulsatile waveforms synchronous with heart rate were observed in 33 cases associated with adequate analgesia. In 5 cases, the pulsatile waveforms were absent due to unilateral analgesia or catheter occlusion (true negatives). In 2 cases, the patients had effective analgesia but we were not able to observe a distinct pulsatile waveform. The pressure waveform analysis through the epidural catheter had a sensitivity of 95%, a positive predictive value of 100%, a specificity of 100% and a negative predictive value of 60%.

conclusionPulsatile pressure waveform recording with CCDDS through the epidural catheter resulted in high sensitivity and positive predictive value which can help the proper placement of the epidural catheter.

Indexed as

combined epidural blockepidural analgesiaepidural pulse waves

Identifiers

PMID34168495
PMCPMC8216732
OpenAlexW3168258592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.