Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This prospective observational study aims to evaluate the impact of epidural catheter placement techniques - loss of resistance (LOR) and hanging drop (HD) - on first-attempt success rates and procedural complications among anesthesia residents. Residents with at least two years of training will perform epidural catheterization under supervision for patients scheduled for elective surgery requiring perioperative epidural analgesia. An independent observer will record procedural details, complications, and postoperative pain scores. The study will enroll 440 patients aged 18-80 with ASA I-III classification.
Epidural catheterization is a cornerstone technique in perioperative and obstetric pain management. Two established methods are commonly used to identify the epidural space: the loss of resistance (LOR) technique, using air or normal saline, and the hanging drop (HD) technique. Although both are widely employed, comparative data on their performance by residents in training are limited. This study prospectively observes which technique the resident chooses, records procedural parameters (depth of epidural space, number of attempts, level of insertion), and documents immediate complications (dural puncture, intravascular placement, paresthesia, hypotension) and postoperative outcomes (NRS scores at 0, 6, 12, and 24 hours; PDPH). Cases in which a resident is unable to complete the procedure are documented separately, including the reason for failure and subsequent management by a supervising specialist. All procedures are performed using an 18G Tuohy needle and standard catheter set. A test dose is administered to all patients following catheter placement. Data are recorded by an independent observer using a standardized data collection form.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loss of Resistance (LOR) Group | Patients in whom the epidural space is identified using the loss of resistance technique. The attending resident uses a syringe filled with air or normal saline attached to the Tuohy needle hub and advances until resistance disappears upon entering the epidural space. |
| |
| Hanging Drop (HD) Group | Patients in whom the epidural space is identified using the hanging drop technique. A drop of normal saline is placed at the Tuohy needle hub and observed to be aspirated inward by the negative epidural pressure as the needle tip traverses the ligamentum flavum. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| epidural catheter placement | Procedure | Epidural catheterization performed using an 18G Tuohy needle and standard catheter set by anesthesia residents with a minimum of two years of training, under specialist supervision. Technique selection (LOR or HD) is at the discretion of the performing resident and is not randomized. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| First-attempt success rate | Defined as successful epidural space identification and catheter placement in a single Tuohy needle insertion attempt, without redirecting the needle. | Time Frame: Immediately upon procedure completion |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Dural puncture rate | Inadvertent dural puncture defined as free flow of cerebrospinal fluid through the Tuohy needle or epidural catheter, confirmed by visual inspection. Recorded as yes/no by the independent observer at the time of the procedure | Intraoperative |
| Catheter Advancement Failure Rate |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Adult patients scheduled for elective/emergency surgery with planned perioperative epidural analgesia or anesthesia at Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital, Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation.
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dilara Göçmen, asst prof | Contact | +90 216 625 4545 | dilara.gocmen@marmara.edu.tr |
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital | Istanbul | Maltepe | 34852 | Turkey (Türkiye) |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Background | 1. Hoffmann VL, Vercauteren MP, Vreugde JP, Hans GH, Coppejans HC, Adriaensen HA. Posterior epidural space depth: safety of the loss of resistance and hanging drop techniques. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 1999;83(5):807-811. 2. Günaydın B, Tan A, Doğru O, Mutlu M, Öztürk G, Güler HG. Comparison of spring-loaded, loss of resistance and hanging drop techniques in lumbar epidural blocks. Agri. 2012;24(1):13-18. 3. Azizov S, Okcu M, Goksu H. Could the Hanging Drop Technique Be an Alternative Method to Loss of Resistance in Cervical Epidural Injections? Pain Physician. 2025;28:217-221. 4. Tran DQH, González AP, Bernucci F, Finlayson RJ. Confirmation of Loss-of-Resistance for Epidural Analgesia. Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. 2015;40(2):166-173. 5. Yoshida K, Tanaka S, Watanabe K. Hanging-Drop Technique Is More Suitable for Epidural Space Confirmation in Patients With Subcutaneous Emphysema After Traumatic Multiple Rib Fractures. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. 2023;37(12). 6. Konrad C, Schüpfer G, Wietlisbach M, Gerber H. Learning manual skills in anesthesiology: Is there a recommended number of cases for anesthetic procedures? Anesthesia & Analgesia. 1998;86(3):635-639. 7. De Oliveira GS, Glassenberg R, Chang R, Fitzgerald P, McCarthy R. Virtual airway simulation to improve dexterity among novices performing fibreoptic intubation. Anaesthesia. 2013;68(10):1053-1058. 8. Kopacz DJ, Neal JM, Pollock JE. The regional anesthesia learning curve. Regional Anesthesia. 1996;21(3):182-190. 9. Naik VN, Devito I, Halpern SH. Cusum analysis is a useful tool to assess resident proficiency at epidural anesthesia. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 2004;51(7):703-708. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
Inability to thread the epidural catheter beyond 3 cm into the epidural space despite confirmed needle placement, necessitating needle repositioning or procedure abandonment. Recorded as yes/no by the independent observer. |
| intraoperative |
| Operator-Assessed Difficulty Score | The performing resident rates the overall technical difficulty of the procedure immediately upon completion using a 5-point Likert scale: 1 = very easy, 2 = easy, 3 = moderate, 4 = difficult, 5 = very difficult. Recorded on the standardized data collection form | Immediately after procedure completion |
| Intravascular catheter placement rate | Unintentional intravascular placement defined as aspiration of blood through the epidural catheter prior to test dose administration. Recorded as yes/no by the independent observer immediately following catheter advancement | intraoperative |
| Postoperative Pain Scores | Pain intensity assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), where 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain. Recorded at four time points: immediately upon arrival to the recovery unit (0 hours), and at 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively by the independent observer. | 0, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively |
| Rate and Type of Assistance Required During Catheter Placement | The level of assistance received by the performing resident is recorded in three categories: (1) No assistance - procedure completed independently; (2) Verbal guidance only - supervising specialist provides verbal instructions without physical intervention; (3) Physical assistance - supervising specialist takes over needle or catheter manipulation partially or completely. Recorded by the independent observer at the time of the procedure. | Intraoperative |
| First-Attempt Success Rate Stratified by Resident Seniority Level | First-attempt success rates are compared across three seniority strata defined by duration of anesthesia training: junior residents (2-3 years), intermediate residents (3-4 years), and senior residents (4 years and above). Seniority is determined by the total duration of anesthesia specialty training at the time of the procedure. | Intraoperative |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010149 | Pain, Postoperative |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D011183 | Postoperative Complications |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D010146 | Pain |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided