Accidental Epidural Catheter Removal Rates and Strength Required for Disconnection: a Retrospective Cohort and Experimental Study

Background: Epidural analgesia requires the use of epidural catheters, which are associated with certain risks such as accidental epidural catheter removal, including dislodgement and disconnection. Few studies have investigated accidental catheter removal rates and directly compared them among epidural connector types. This study aimed to examine the differences in accidental catheter removal rates associated with different catheter connector types and to experimentally determine the linear tensile strength required to induce disconnection in each connector type.Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients who underwent elective surgery and received patient-controlled epidural analgesia between December 2019 and August 2020. Patients were divided into groups according to the type of catheter connection used: standard (old group), new standard (new group), and new standard with taping (taping group). Furthermore, we prepared 60 sets of epidural catheters and connectors comprising 20 sets for each of the old, new, and taping groups, and used the digital tension meter to measure the maximum tensile strength required to induce disconnection. A multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to examine risk factors for disconnection. The experimental study groups were compared using one-way analysis of variance.Results: The clinical study involved in 920 patients (360, 182, and 378 patients in the old, new, and taping group, respectively). Dislodgement rates were similar among the three groups. Disconnection was most likely to occur in the new group (5.5%) and least likely to occur in the taping group (0.3%) compared to the old group (1.9%). However, the new group was not a risk factor for disconnection. The experimental study identified tensile strengths of 12.41 N, 12.06 N, and 19.65 N in the old, new, and taping groups, respectively. Comparison tests showed a significant difference in the tensile strength required for disconnection between the new and taping groups but not between the new and old groups.Conclusions: These findings suggest that taping the catheter connector connection may reduce the risk of disconnection, and thereby help improve patient outcomes. Further studies are required to clarify other parameters that may affect patient safety in this context.

Rupture of an epidural filter connector during bolus administration of local anesthetic: a case report

Background Epidural catheters are routinely placed for many surgical procedures and to treat various pain conditions. Known complications arising from epidural catheter equipment malfunction include epidural pump failure, epidural catheter shearing, epidural catheter connector failure, epidural filter connector cracking, and loss-of-resistance syringe malfunction. Practitioners need to be aware of these potentially dangerous complications and take measures to mitigate the chances of causing significant patient harm. We report on the complete breakage of an epidural filter connector during epidural bolus administration of local anesthetic by hand with a syringe. Case presentation A B. Braun Perifix® epidural catheter was placed in a 73-year-old male scheduled for radical prostatectomy. During the operation, a continuous infusion of local anesthetic was administered through the epidural catheter in addition to general endotracheal anesthesia. At the conclusion of surgery and after extubation, the patient endorsed incisional pain. The epidural filter connector broke in half as a bolus of local anesthetic was administered by hand with a syringe. The local anesthetic sprayed widely throughout the room as the fragmented epidural filter connector became a projectile object that recoiled and struck the patient. Conclusions This incident placed the patient and surrounding healthcare providers at substantial risk for injury and infection from the fractured epidural filter connector becoming a projectile object and from the local anesthetic spray. The most plausible cause of this event was from a large amount of pressure being applied to the filter connector. This may have occurred by excessive force being applied by hand to the syringe, by the presence of a clogged filter, or by the catheter being kinked or blocked proximal to the filter. Being aware of this deleterious complication and potentially modifying existing epidural bolus techniques, such as using smaller syringes with less applied force and checking all epidural components vigilantly prior to and during bolus administration, can help anesthesia providers deliver the safest possible care to patients with epidural catheters.

State-of-the-art colorectal disease: postoperative ileus

Purpose Postoperative Ileus (POI) remains an important complication for patients after abdominal surgery with an incidence of 10–27% representing an everyday issue for abdominal surgeons. It accounts for patients’ discomfort, increased morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, and a high economic burden. This review outlines the current understanding of POI pathophysiology and focuses on preventive treatments that have proven to be effective or at least show promising effects. Methods Pathophysiology and recommendations for POI treatment are summarized on the basis of a selective literature review. Results While a lot of therapies have been researched over the past decades, many of them failed to prove successful in meta-analyses. To date, there is no evidence-based treatment once POI has manifested. In the era of enhanced recovery after surgery or fast track regimes, a few approaches show a beneficial effect in preventing POI: multimodal, opioid-sparing analgesia with placement of epidural catheters or transverse abdominis plane block; μ-opioid-receptor antagonists; and goal-directed fluid therapy and in general the use of minimally invasive surgery. Conclusion The results of different studies are often contradictory, as a concise definition of POI and reliable surrogate endpoints are still absent. These will be needed to advance POI research and provide clinicians with consistent data to improve the treatment strategies.

Epidural Anesthesia

During epidural anesthesia, local anesthetics and adjuvants are administered into the epidural space by a single-shot, intermittent, or continuous technique. Epidural analgesia is used for open thoracic surgery, major intra-abdominal surgery with extensive surgical dissection, major lower extremity surgery, and long-term pain management. Epidural anesthesia is contraindicated in pediatric patients with uncorrected coagulopathy, hemophilia, liver disease causing coagulopathy, skin infection at the insertion site, bacteremia/sepsis, or lack of parental consent. Anesthesiologists should be familiar with the current American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine guidelines regarding anticoagulation and bleeding disorders in the setting of neuraxial anesthesia before performing epidural anesthesia. In infants, the tip of the conus medullaris and dural sac are located lower in the spinal column than in adults. Additionally, because the epidural space contains less fat and fibrous tissue than in adults, in infants it is easier to insert an epidural catheter at a lower level and then to thread it up to a higher level. In infants younger than 6 months, the vertebral column remains cartilaginous, and epidural catheters can be visualized with ultrasonography. In infants, for the initial placement of the needle, there is a more subtle “give” as the ligamentum flavum is pierced than in adult patients. As a general rule, the depth of the epidural space is 1 mm/kg of body weight (e.g., the depth of the epidural space in a 10-kg child would be 10 mm). However, because wide variation exists in the depth of the epidural space, a test for loss of resistance is performed as soon as the epidural needle has entered the supraspinous ligament.

CAUTIs in Patients With Thoracic Epidurals

Background: The Surgical Care Improvement Project 9 (SCIP 9) mandates the removal of urinary catheters within 48 hours following surgery to reduce the risk of catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs). Although patients with thoracic epidurals are not exempt from SCIP 9, these patients may be inherently different from other surgical patients. Early removal of Foley catheters may cause urinary retention and recatheterization, which in turn can lead to CAUTI or urethral trauma. Our hospital’s current policy is to allow Foley catheters to remain in place until the thoracic epidural is removed. The goal of our study was to identify and compare the rate of CAUTI in patients with thoracic epidural catheters to the rate of CAUTI in patients without thoracic epidural catheters Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with and without thoracic epidurals who had Foley catheters during hospitalization from July 1, 2017, to May 31, 2019. We used descriptive statistics to compare CAUTI rates based on unit between the 2 groups of patients. Results: We identified 1,834 unique patients with thoracic epidurals and urinary catheters during the study period. We found 4 CAUTIs of 9,896 catheter days (0.4 CAUTIs per 1,000 catheter days) in patients with epidural catheters and 43 CAUTIs of 36,809 catheter days (1.17 CAUTI per 1,000 catheter days) in patients without thoracic epidurals for a rate ratio of 0.346 (95% CI, 0.1242– 0.9639; P < .03). We conducted a sensitivity analysis on a subset of patients admitted under the cardiothoracic service and compared the patients with Foley catheters with and without thoracic epidurals. In this subset, we found 1 CAUTI in 5,890 catheter days (0.17 CAUTI per 1,000 catheter days) in patients with thoracic epidurals and 4 CAUTIs in 9,429 catheter days (0.42 CAUTIs per 1,000 catheter days) in patients without thoracic epidurals), for a rate of 0.4002 (95% CI, 0.0447–3.5808; P < .39). In this subgroup, 7.0% of patients with thoracic epidurals required a second Foley catheter compared to 16.9% of patients without thoracic epidurals who required a second Foley catheter (P < .01). Conclusions: Although patients with thoracic epidurals maintain Foley catheters beyond 48 hours, the CAUTI rate in these patients is lower than in patients without thoracic epidurals. Therefore, removing Foley catheters within 48 hours of surgery in patients with thoracic epidurals may not reduce the risk of CAUTI and, in fact, could be harmful. Further evaluation of confounding variables is warranted.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None