• Su Yeon Kim, Hyo-Seok Na, Ji In Park, Keum-O Lee, and Hyun-Jung Shin.
• Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam 13620, Republic of Korea.
• Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Jan 19; 60 (1).

AbstractBackground and Objectives: Spinal anesthesia is widely used in various types of surgery. However, several complications can occur afterward. This study aimed to identify differences in the incidence of anesthesia-related complications according to the approach methods (midline versus paramedian) for landmark-based spinal anesthesia. Materials and Methods: We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science, for eligible randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) incidence, and secondary outcomes were low back pain (LBP) incidence and success rate in the first trial of spinal anesthesia. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. Results: In total, 2280 patients from 13 randomized controlled trials were included in the final analysis. The incidence rates of PDPH were 5.9% and 10.4% in the paramedian and midline approach groups, respectively. The pooled effect size revealed that the incidence of PDPH (OR: 0.43, 95% CI [0.22-0.83]; p = 0.01; I2 = 53%) and LBP (OR: 0.27, 95% CI [0.16-0.44]; p < 0.001; I2 = 16%) decreased, and the success rate in the first attempt was higher (OR: 2.30, 95% CI [1.36-3.87]; p = 0.002; I2 = 35%) with the paramedian than with the midline approach. Conclusions: Paramedian spinal anesthesia reduced PDPH and LBP and increased the success rate of the first attempt.

19 keywords...

hide…