You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Changes in needle maneuver space and optimal insertion site for midline neuraxial puncture with progressive age: an analysis in computed tomography scans

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original research
Changes in needle maneuver space and optimal insertion site for midline neuraxial puncture with progressive age: an analysis in computed tomography scans
  1. Martin Hagenaars1,
  2. John J van den Dobbelsteen2 and
  3. Dennis J van Gerwen3
  1. 1Anesthesiology, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  2. 2Delft University of Technology, Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft, The Netherlands
  3. 3ForceSense B.V, Delft, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Dr Martin Hagenaars, Anesthesiology, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen 6532SZ, The Netherlands; m.hagenaars{at}cwz.nl

Abstract

Introduction We systematically describe the morphology and accessibility of interspinous spaces across age groups of patients. Our primary goal was to objectively estimate if the maneuver space for a virtual spinal needle changes with age. Our secondary goal was to estimate if the optimal site and angle for midline neuraxial puncture change with age.

Methods Measurements were performed in mid-sagittal CT images. The CT images were retrospectively collected from the database of the Department of Radiology of our hospital. Three age groups were studied: 21–30 years (n=36, abbreviated Y(oung)), 51–60 years (n=43, abbreviated M(iddle-aged)) and older than 80 years (n=46, abbreviated Old).

A needle trajectory is defined by the chosen puncture point and by the angle at which the needle is directed to its target. We define a Spinal Accessibility Index (SAI) by numerically integrating for an interspace all possible combinations of puncture points and angles that lead to a successful virtual puncture. Successful in this context means that the needle tip reaches the spinal or epidural space without bone contact. Reproducible calculation of the SAI was performed with the help of custom-made software. The larger the value of the SAI, the more possible successful needle trajectories exist that the practitioner may choose from.

The optimal puncture point and optimal angle in an age group at a certain level of the spine are defined by the combination of these two, which generates the highest success rate of the entire sample of this age group.

Results At all levels of the spine, the median SAI differed significantly between age groups (independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test, p<0.001–0.047). The SAI consistently decreased with increasing age. Post-hoc analyses using pairwise comparisons showed a significantly higher SAI in group Y versus Old at all levels (p<0.001—0.006) except at level thoracic (Th)1–Th2 (p=0.138). The SAI was significantly higher in group M versus Old at all levels (p<0.001–0.028) except at level Th1–Th2 (p=0.061), Th4–Th5 (p=0.083), Th9–Th10 (p=1.00) and Th10–Th11 (p=1.00).

Conclusions Needle maneuver space in midline neuraxial puncture significantly decreases with progressive age at all levels of the spine. Optimal puncture points and angles are similar between age groups.

  • Anesthesia, Local
  • Injections, Spinal
  • Patient Simulation

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplemental information. Not applicable.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2023-104981

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    Data are available upon reasonable request. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplemental information. Not applicable.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors MH helped design the study, conduct the study, collect the data, analyze the data, prepare the manuscript, revise the manuscript, and approve the final version. JJvdD helped design the study, revise the manuscript, and approve the final version. DJvG helped design the study, analyze the data, prepare the manuscript, revise the manuscript, and approve the final version. MH is the author responsible for the overall content.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.