Elsevier

The Spine Journal

Volume 15, Issue 7, 1 July 2015, Pages 1571-1576
The Spine Journal

Clinical Study
Postdural puncture headache: impact of needle type, a randomized trial

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.03.009Get rights and content

Abstract

Background context

The most common adverse event after a lumbar puncture (LP) is a headache: In anaesthesiology, well studied is the protective effect of atraumatic spinal needles, and they are routinely used. However, this is less well known in diagnostic LP, and neurologists use atraumatic needles in less than 2% of times.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to define the impact of needle type, atraumatic (Sprotte [S]) versus traumatic (Quincke [Q]) on postdural puncture headache (PDPH) incidence.

Study design

The study is based on a prospective, randomized, and simple-blinded clinical trial.

Patient Sample

Patients older than 14 years were scheduled for a diagnostic or therapeutic LP.

Outcome Measures

The outcome measure included the development of PDPH according to the International Headache Association criteria.

Methods

Patients fulfilling eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to one of two kinds of spinal needle: atraumatic or S-type or traumatic or Q-type. They were interviewed on days 2 and 7 about the development of PDPH.

Results

The incidence of PDPH was 22.43% with Q-type needle and 8.51% with S-type needle, p=.04. The duration of PDPH in patients in the S-type was 1 day or less, compared with a median of 4.14 days in the Q-type (p=.00). In the logistic regression model, the S-type needle together with the age of the patient were the only two statistically significant factors in the development of postlumbar puncture headache (PLPH), both of them being protective.

Conclusions

We found a lower incidence of PDPH with atraumatic needles, and it was statistically significant compared with the traumatic needles. Our study confirms the effectiveness of the atraumatic needles to prevent PDPH.

Introduction

Evidence & Methods

According to the authors, the use of atraumatic needles is uncommon in diagnostic lumbar punctures. Utilization of atraumatic needles has been linked to lower rates of post–lumbar puncture headache. The authors performed a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial to define the incidence post–lumbar puncture headaches based on the needle types used to perform the lumbar puncture.

Patients were randomized to receive lumbar puncture with a traumatic or atraumatic needle. Analysis was performed as treated, with 30 patients randomized to the atraumatic group receiving lumbar puncture with a traumatic needle. The rate of post–lumbar puncture headache was significantly lower among patients punctured with an atraumatic needle. The duration of headaches was also significantly shorter in the atraumatic group.

The ideal means of performing this analysis would have been along intent-to-treat lines, rather than as treated. Nonetheless, this investigation provides evidence in support of the use of atraumatic needles in lumbar puncture, although their utilization may be technically challenging. Readers should consider the authors’ inclusion criteria, as well as socio-cultural differences that may exist between their patients and those who participated in this study, before they apply the findings of this work to clinical practice.

—The Editors

Postdural puncture headache (PDPH) is the most common complication of lumbar puncture (LP), occurring in about 40% of times [1], [2]. According to the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-III), it is defined as a bifrontal and/or occipital headache that appears within 5 days after LP, which occurs or worsens when upright position is assumed and improves or disappears lying down. It may be accompanied by tinnitus, hearing loss, photophobia, or nausea. Usually, it resolves spontaneously within 1 week [3]. In most cases, PDPH resolves spontaneously with an estimated remission rate of 72% at 5 days [4]. Conservative methods of treatment of PDPH include bed rest, analgesia, and hydration. When this management fails, oral or intravenous caffeine is helpful, but if the PDPH is severe, it is best treated with an epidural blood patch [5].

The pathophysiology is unclear, and there are probably different and not mutually exclusive mechanisms. The needle produces a dural defect and consequent spinal fluid leakage into the epidural space, resulting in a decrease of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure and volume. Then, when the patient assumes the upright position, he experiences traction on pain-sensitive structures (meningeal membranes, blood vessels and nerves). Other theories explain the PDPH based on a compensatory intracranial vasodilatation, according to the Monro-Kellie doctrine (the constant volume of the skull contents), to alleviate the lower CSF pressure [6], [7], [8].

Postdural puncture headache is more frequent in the female gender, younger age, and patients with lower body mass index (BMI) [9], [10], [11]. The three technical factors that have been discussed as possibly reducing the incidence of PDPH are the smaller needle diameter or gauge (G), which is the most important, the insertion of the needle with the bevel parallel to the long axis of the spine, rather than in a perpendicular direction, and the reinsertion of the stylet before needle withdrawal [6], [12], [13]. An extensive meta-analysis has shown the ineffectiveness of bed rest after LP [14]. However, the needle design is a less-known factor in the development of PDPH. Spinal needles can be either cutting (traumatic) or pencil point (atraumatic). According to the histologic studies, atraumatic needles (Sprotte [S] or Whitacre [W] type) have a blunt tip, which produces tearing of the dura fibers creating a smaller hole that closes rapidly and results in relatively small CSF leakage. However, the traumatic needle (Quincke [Q] type) has a sharp tip, which cuts the dura fibers in multiple directions and creates a larger hole that heals more slowly and is associated with a greater CSF leakage [10]. Hence, the atraumatic needle produces a smaller dural defect, which closes rapidly and results in lower incidence of PDPH [6]. Although the S-type needle is slightly more expensive than the Q-type needle, a cost-efficacy analysis showed the first one to be more efficient when the additional expenses because of the PDPH were included [15].

In the field of anaesthesiology, thinner needles are used for LP, and the advantage of atraumatic needles in reducing postdural puncture headache is well established. In fact, the frequency of PDPH appears to be doubled in the diagnostic punctures in relation to the anaesthetics one [16]. However, in diagnostic LP, the use of 25G spinal needles, customary in spinal anesthesia, could be an obstacle to receive CSF enough for diagnostic purposes, and the ordinary small diameter used is 22G.

In contrast with the experience in anaesthesiology, the type of needle factor is less studied in diagnostic LP. Up to date, seven comparative and methodologically correct studies investigate the influence of needle type in PDPH [1], [10], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], and three of them showed a lower incidence of PLPH with atraumatic needle, as presented in Table 1. However, neurologists use atraumatic needles in less than 2% of their patients [22].

It is justified to do additional and methodologically correct studies to support the recommendation of the use of atraumatic needle because PLPH is an important cause of iatrogenic morbidity after an LP, and its use is still limited in standard neurological practice [23]. To define the impact of needle type on PDPH, we performed a prospective, randomized, and simple-blinded trial comparing the incidence of PDPH in patients undergoing LPs with traumatic or Q-type versus atraumatic or S-type 22G needles.

Section snippets

Methods

We performed a prospective, randomized, and simple-blinded trial with blinded interviewer. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Segovia's General Hospital (Spain). Informed consent was obtained from all the patients or legal representatives. The study group consisted of consecutive patients older than 14 years of age, who scheduled for a diagnostic or therapeutic LP (evaluation of central nervous system diseases or application of chemotherapy) between October 2008 and April 2012,

Results

Two hundred and seventeen patients were initially registered in the study. Sixty-three patients were discarded because of exclusion criteria, and 154 were finally randomized and completed the follow-up. One hundred percentage of eligible potential participants agreed to participate. Seventy-seven patients were assigned to undergo LP with Q-type and 77 with S-type needle, both of them 22G.

In 30 cases, the physicians changed the needle type randomly assigned after unsuccessful attempts with the

Discussion

Postdural puncture headache is the most common complication of the LP [1], [2]. The most important and better-known predisposing factor is the size of the needle. The smaller needle diameter reduces the incidence of PDPH [6], [12], [13], and not only the caliber of the needle has a significant role in the pathogenesis of PDPH but also the shape of the needle tip plays a crucial role. However, needle design is a less-known factor in the development of PDPH in the standard neurological practice

Conclusions

We found a lower incidence of PDPH with atraumatic needle, and the result was statistically significant compared with traumatic needle. Our study confirms the effectiveness of the atraumatic needle to prevent PDPH. We recommend the use and implementation of atraumatic needles for diagnostic and therapeutic LP in standard neurological practice.

References (25)

  • D.K. Turnbull et al.

    Postdural puncture headache: pathogenesis, prevention and treatment

    Br J Anaesth

    (2003)
  • E.R. Hammond et al.

    Needle type and the risk of post-lumbar puncture headache in the outpatient neurology clinic

    J Neurol Sci

    (2011)
  • D. Levine et al.

    The pathophysiology of lumbar puncture headache

    J Neurol Sci

    (2001)
  • M. Strupp et al.

    “Atraumatic” Sprotte needle reduces the incidence of post-lumbar puncture headaches

    Neurology

    (2001)
  • R. Lavi et al.

    Lumbar puncture: it is time to change the needle

    Eur Neurol

    (2010)
  • The international classification of headache disorders: 3rd Edition (IHCD-III)

    Cephalalgia

    (2013)
  • D. Bezov et al.

    Post-dural puncture headache: part I diagnosis, epidemiology, etiology and pathophysiology

    Headache

    (2010)
  • J.A. Amorim et al.

    Postdural puncture is a risk factor for new postdural puncture headache

    Cephalalgia

    (2008)
  • S.T. Vilming et al.

    The significance of age, sex and cerebrospinal fluid pressure in post-lumbar puncture headache

    Cephalalgia

    (1989)
  • R. Lavi et al.

    Standard vs atraumatic Whitacre needle for diagnostic lumbar puncture: a randomized trial

    Neurology

    (2006)
  • K.M. Kuntz et al.

    Post-lumbar puncture headaches. Experience in 501 consecutive procedures

    Neurology

    (1992)
  • H. Flaatten et al.

    Puncture technique and postural postdural puncture headache. A randomised, double-blind study comparing transverse and parallel puncture

    Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

    (1998)
  • Cited by (27)

    • Risk factors in post-dural puncture headache

      2023, Revista Clinica Espanola
    • Does post dural puncture headache exist in idiopathic intracranial hypertension? A pilot study

      2021, Revue Neurologique
      Citation Excerpt :

      Women were not more likely to present with PDPH but possibly because only 8% of our subjects were men. Similarly, young age was not a significant risk factor for PDPH occurrence but again, possibly because only five patients were older than 50 years (7%) [20]. Although a low BMI is considered a risk factor for PDPH in the general population [5], its importance remains unclear in the context of IIH, in the literature [12] as in our study.

    • Low Incidence of Postdural Puncture Headache Further Reduced With Atraumatic Spinal Needle: A Retrospective Cohort Study

      2021, Pediatric Neurology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Collection of CSF via LP is a straightforward procedure; however, institutional review boards may deny inclusion of LP for research purposes, especially in the pediatric population, due to perceived risks to the research participant, such as postdural puncture headache (PDPH). PDPH is the most common adverse event associated with the LP procedure, with published incidences ranging from 6% to 40% in adults, but incidence in children is largely unknown.2-5 Most cases of PDPH appear within 72 hours following the procedure.6

    • Transforaminal lumbar puncture for intrathecal access: Case series with literature review and comparison to other techniques

      2020, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
      Citation Excerpt :

      Post-dural puncture headache is the most common complication following LP, seen in up to a third of patients and is classically positional, exacerbated when upright and improved when recumbent [25]. Technique related risk factors include larger needle gauge, use of cutting needles and bevel position perpendicular to dural fibers [27]. The rate of headaches in the four previously published case series of TFLP ranged between 0 and 15% [3,8–10].

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    FDA device/drug status: Not applicable.

    Author disclosures: AC: Nothing to disclose. CT: Nothing to disclose. LMG-O: Nothing to disclose. CG: Nothing to disclose. RG: Nothing to disclose. MIZ: Nothing to disclose. AM: Nothing to disclose. MFR: Nothing to disclose. PG: Nothing to disclose. JSR-V: Nothing to disclose. MF: Nothing to disclose. NM: Nothing to disclose. JD: Nothing to disclose.

    The study is not industry sponsored and received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. There is no financial disclosure related to the research covered in this article. There are no conflicts of interest concerning to the manuscript. AC: acquisition of data and interpretation of data; CT: conception and design and analysis and interpretation of data; LMG-O: analysis of data; and CG, RG, MIZ, AM, MFR, PG, JSR-V, MF, NM, JD, acquisition of data.

    View full text