What Needle Diameter Should Physician Use When They Perform Lumbar Puncture ? A Randomized Controlled Trial
Should Physicians Use a 24 Gauge Spinal Needle Instead of a 22 Gauge When Performing a Lumbar Puncture ? A Randomized Controlled Trial.
1 other identifier
interventional
62
1 country
1
Brief Summary
This study is intended to help guide the choice of needle diameter when performing a lumbar puncture. Smaller spinal needles have been shown to decrease rate of adverse events such as post-lumbar puncture headache and hearing loss. The main drawback to using smaller needles is diminished flow rate; some textbooks recommend using needles no smaller than 22 gauge because of the slow flow rate though others recommend smaller needles, namely 22-24 gauge. Some authors have described a successful use of spinal needles as small as 25 gauge when performing a lumbar puncture. The investigators do not believe that the flow-rate difference between 22 and 24 gauge needles is significant enough to justify using the larger needles. The investigators trial will compare the Whitacre 22 gauge and Whitacre 24 gauge needles for flow rate, and incidence of the known complications of pain during procedure and backache at 8 and 15 days post-procedure. The investigators will also look at whether smaller needles are associated with less pain during the procedure and less backache the next 2 weeks after the procedure.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for phase_4
Started Nov 2011
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
November 1, 2011
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 15, 2011
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
November 30, 2011
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
February 1, 2013
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
February 1, 2013
CompletedMarch 22, 2016
March 1, 2016
1.3 years
November 15, 2011
March 19, 2016
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Time to collect 5 ml of CSF
Time 0 will be when the first drop of CSF emerges from the needle hub. Time stops when 5 ml of CSF is retrieved (last drop dripping out of the needle hub) Volume will be confirmed by a blinded research assistant. In the event that the volume differs slightly from 5ml, the time will be adjusted accordingly to reflect collection of exactly 5ml.
after 5 ml of CSF is retrieved
Secondary Outcomes (38)
Time to collect 7 ml of CSF
after 7 ml of CSF is retrieved
Time to collect 8 ml of CSF
after 8 ml of CSF is retrieved
Time to collect 9 ml of CSF
after 9 ml of CSF is retrieved
Time to collect 10 ml of CSF
after 10 ml of CSF is retrieved
Time to collect 6 ml of CSF
after 6 ml of CSF is retrieved
- +33 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Whitacre 22 gauge
ACTIVE COMPARATORlumbar puncture performed with a Whitacre 22 gauge (BD)
Whitacre 24 gauge
EXPERIMENTALlumbar puncture performed with a Whitacre 24 gauge (BD)
Interventions
Whitacre 24 gauge spinal needle 3 inches 1/2. Manufactured by Becton Dickinson
Whitacre 22 gauge spinal needle 3 inches 1/2 manufactured by Becton Dickinson
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- All adult patients (\>= 18 years old) referred at the Neurological Day Center to get a lumbar puncture
You may not qualify if:
- Contraindication to get a lumbar puncture
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Montreal Neurological Hospital and Institute
Montreal, Quebec, H3A 2B4, Canada
Related Publications (3)
Armon C, Evans RW; Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Addendum to assessment: Prevention of post-lumbar puncture headaches [RETIRED]: report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2005 Aug 23;65(4):510-2. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000173034.96211.1b.
PMID: 16116106BACKGROUNDAbouleish E, Mitchell M, Taylor G, Miller H, Warters D, Rashad MN. Comparative flow rates of saline in commonly used spinal needles including pencil-tip needles. Reg Anesth. 1994 Jan-Feb;19(1):34-42.
PMID: 8148292BACKGROUNDCarson D, Serpell M. Choosing the best needle for diagnostic lumbar puncture. Neurology. 1996 Jul;47(1):33-7. doi: 10.1212/wnl.47.1.33.
PMID: 8710120BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Liam Durcan, MD, FRCP(c)
Montreal Neurological Hospital and Institute, McGill University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 4
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- PREVENTION
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- MD, FRCPc, Neurologist-in-Chief, Montreal Neurological Hospital Interim Clinical Director, Neurology, McGill University Health Center
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 15, 2011
First Posted
November 30, 2011
Study Start
November 1, 2011
Primary Completion
February 1, 2013
Study Completion
February 1, 2013
Last Updated
March 22, 2016
Record last verified: 2016-03