You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 296 No. 16, October 25, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  The Rational Clinical Examination
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (7)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Bacterial Infections
 •Neurology
 •Headache
 •Meningitis
 •Quality of Care
 •Quality of Care, Other
 •Diagnosis
 •The Rational Clinical Examination
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

CLINICIAN'S CORNER
How Do I Perform a Lumbar Puncture and Analyze the Results to Diagnose Bacterial Meningitis?

Sharon E. Straus, MD, MSc, FRCPC; Kevin E. Thorpe, MMath; Jayna Holroyd-Leduc, MD, FRCPC

JAMA. 2006;296:2012-2022.

Context  Diagnostic lumbar punctures (LPs), commonly used to rule out meningitis, are associated with adverse events.

Objective  To systematically review the evidence about diagnostic LP techniques that may decrease the risk of adverse events and the evidence about test accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis in adult patients with suspected bacterial meningitis.

Data Sources  We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (using Ovid and PubMed) from 1966 to January 2006 and EMBASE from 1980 to January 2006 without language restrictions to identify relevant studies and identified others from the bibliographies of retrieved articles.

Study Selection  We included randomized trials of patients aged 18 years or older undergoing interventions to facilitate a successful diagnostic LP or to potentially reduce adverse events. Studies assessing the accuracy of biochemical analysis of the CSF for possible bacterial meningitis were also identified.

Data Extraction  Two investigators independently appraised study quality and extracted relevant data. For studies of the LP technique, data on the intervention and the outcome were extracted. For studies of the laboratory diagnosis of bacterial meningitis, data on the reference standard and test accuracy were extracted.

Data Synthesis  We found 15 randomized trials. A random-effects model was used for quantitative synthesis. Five studies of 587 patients compared atraumatic needles with standard needles and found a nonsignificant decrease in the odds of headache with an atraumatic needle (absolute risk reduction [ARR], 12.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], –1.72% to 26.2%). Reinsertion of the stylet before needle removal decreased the risk of headache (ARR, 11.3%; 95% CI, 6.50%-16.2%). The combined results from 4 studies of 717 patients showed a nonsignificant decrease in headache in patients who were mobilized after LP (ARR, 2.9%; 95% CI, –3.4 to 9.3%). Four studies on the accuracy of biochemical analysis of CSF in patients with suspected meningitis met inclusion criteria. A CSF–blood glucose ratio of 0.4 or less (likelihood ratio [LR], 18; 95% CI, 12-27]), CSF white blood cell count of 500/µL or higher (LR, 15; 95% CI, 10-22), and CSF lactate level of 31.53 mg/dL or more (≥3.5 mmol/L; LR, 21; 95% CI, 14-32) accurately diagnosed bacterial meningitis.

Conclusions  These data suggest that small-gauge, atraumatic needles may decrease the risk of headache after diagnostic LP. Reinsertion of the stylet before needle removal should occur and patients do not require bed rest after the procedure. Future research should focus on evaluating interventions to optimize the success of a diagnostic LP and to enhance training in procedural skills.


Author Affiliations: Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta (Dr Straus); Knowledge Translation Program, University of Toronto/St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario (Drs Straus and Holroyd-Leduc and Mr Thorpe); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario (Mr Thorpe); Division of General Internal Medicine, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario (Dr Holroyd-Leduc).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTERS

How to Perform a Lumbar Puncture
Jeffrey L. Kaufman
JAMA. 2007;297(8):810.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

How to Perform a Lumbar Puncture
Stephen Piwinski, Wendell Johnson, and Michelle Kawasaki
JAMA. 2007;297(8):810-811.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

How to Perform a Lumbar Puncture—Reply
Sharon E. Straus and Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
JAMA. 2007;297(8):811.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Lumbar Puncture
Janet M. Torpy, Cassio Lynm, and Richard M. Glass
JAMA. 2006;296(16):2050.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Review: Pathophysiology and treatment of bacterial meningitis
Hoffman and Weber
Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders 2009;2:401-412.
ABSTRACT  

ADDITIONAL ARTICLES ABSTRACTED IN ACP JOURNAL CLUB
Evid. Based Med. 2007;12:62-62.
FULL TEXT  

How to Perform a Lumbar Puncture
Kaufman
JAMA 2007;297:810-810.
FULL TEXT  

How to Perform a Lumbar Puncture
Piwinski et al.
JAMA 2007;297:810-811.
FULL TEXT  

Evidently. . .
Lehman
Evid. Based Med. 2007;12:8-8.
FULL TEXT  

Carphology by Rajendra
PN 2007;7:66-66.
FULL TEXT  

Smaller atraumatic needles are probably best for diagnostic lumbar punctures
BMJ 2006;333:0-0.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.