• Rohit Varshney and Gaurav Jain.
• Department of Anaesthesia, Teerthankar Mahaveer Medical College, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.
• Anesth Essays Res. 2013 Sep 1;7(3):376-80.

BackgroundAlthough fluid bolus is considered as a conventional prophylactic measure to prevent spinal-induced hypotension; vasopressors are nevertheless required. Low dose spinal anesthetics could markedly reduce such episodes of hypotension, by minimizing sympathetic blockade.AimsWe chose to compare the relative efficacy of colloid preload versus coload under low dose spinal anesthesia, for elective cesarean delivery.Settings And DesignA prospective, randomized, double-blinded study.Materials And MethodsIn total, 42 parturients were randomized to receive a preload (Group P) of hydroxyl ethyl starch (10 ml/kg) over 20 min before initiation of low dose spinal anesthesia (hyperbaric bupivacaine 5.5 mg with fentanyl 25 μg) or coload (Group C) of an identical fluid over 5 min, starting at the time of identification of cerebrospinal fluid. Our primary outcome included hemodynamic parameters and the incidence of hypotension. The neonatal outcome and side-effects were also monitored.Statistical AnalysisMann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact/Chi-square test, whichever appropriate. A P < 0.05 was considered to be significant.ResultsThe incidence of hypotension was lower in Group P (10%) when compared with Group C (25%), though insignificant statistically. The hemodynamic parameters were better in Group P, though intergroup statistical differences were not observed. The time to the first episode of hypotension was longer in the Group P (17 min) as compared with Group C (14 min). No notable side-effects or adverse neonatal outcome was noted.ConclusionColloid preload has a clinical advantage over the coload strategy, in reducing hypotensive episodes under low dose spinal anesthesia. Preload is better under large hemodynamic fluctuations while coload is preferable for emergency scenarios.

3 keywords...

hide…