Regarding central neuraxial blocks, which one of the
following is MOST likely to cause permanent neurological injury?
a) An epidural sited for obstetric indications
b) An epidural sited for adult general surgical
indications
c) An epidural sited for paediatric general surgical
indications
d) A spinal sited rather than an epidural
e)
An epidural sited for chronic pain indications
Answer: b
Explanation:
In 2009, the ‘NAP3’ study was published on the
website of the Royal College of
Anaesthetists. It is an impressive body of work that
has given a numerator and denominator
for injury following central neuraxial blocks (CNB).
To ascertain the denominator
they estimated the total number of CNB performed in
a year by looking at a two-week
snapshot. All of the units using epidurals in the UK
returned information for the snapshot
and a denominator figure of just over 700 000CNBs
per year was found. Potential
cases of permanent neurological injury following CNB
were reported and reviewed to
determine the likelihood of the injury being due to
the CNB. This allowed the reporters
to attach an optimistic figure (in which only the highly
likely to be due to the CNB
were included) and a pessimistic figure (in which some of the more tenuous associations
between CNB and injury were included). The findings showed that the risk was
generally lower than people had previously thought.
Epidurals caused more harm
than spinals (6.1 vs. 2.2 cases per 100 000 for the ‘pessimistic’ interpretation) and the
highest risk group for epidurals was in adult
general peri-operative care. This was
probably due to the high incidence of sicker
patients having thoracic epidurals on a
background of pharmacological or pathological
derangement of their clotting cascade.
Reference
Royal College of Anaesthetists. Major complications
of central neuraxial block in the
United Kingdom. Report and findings of the 3rd National
Audit Project of the Royal
College of Anaesthetists. London: RCA, 2009. Online
at www.rcoa.ac.uk/docs/
NAP3_web-large.pdf
(Accessed 30 October 2009)
No comments:
Post a Comment