Prevention of epidural catheter migration: a comparative evaluation of two tunneling techniques

• Main Authors: Sujeet Gautam, Anil Agarwal, Pravin Kumar Das, Sandeep Khuba, Sanjay Kumar
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2021-02-01
• Series: Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
• Subjects: catheter associated infection; catheter migration; epidural analgesia; epidural catheter tunneling; epidural injection; postoperative pain
• Online Access: http://ekja.org/upload/pdf/kja-20131.pdf

Background Epidural analgesia failure episodes can be reduced by catheter fixation techniques with a lower incidence of catheter migration. In this clinical study, we compared the roles of two epidural catheter tunneling techniques for the prevention of epidural catheter migration. Methods Patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were randomized into three groups of 50 patients each based on the method used to secure the epidural catheter. In the control group (CG), the epidural catheter was secured without tunneling. Tunneling groups 1 and 2 (TG1 and TG2) were defined as tunneling with and without a catheter loop, respectively. The primary outcome measure was the migration of the epidural catheter, while the secondary outcome measures were the adequacy of analgesia and signs of inflammation. All patients were followed up by the acute pain service team twice daily in the postoperative period until the epidural catheter was removed. The results were analyzed by the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), chi-square test, and Fisher’s exact test. P values <0.05 were considered significant. Results The three groups were similar with respect to patient characteristics. Catheter migration was significantly reduced in TG2 (two patients) compared to those in the other two groups, i.e., TG1 (eight patients) (P = 0.045) and CG (17 patients) (P = 0.001). No differences were found amongst the three groups in analgesia adequacy and catheter site inflammation (P > 0.05). Conclusions Catheter migration was significantly reduced by tunneling without a catheter loop in TG2 as compared to the other two groups. Therefore, we suggest routine use of tunneling without a catheter loop technique in anesthesia practice and look forward to future studies with larger sample sizes.