Anaesthesia
-
General anaesthesia for emergency caesarean section is associated with the shortest time-to-incision but also lower 5-min Apgar scores. Longer time-to-incision is not associated with worse neonatal outcomes.
pearl -
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Randomised double-blind comparison of bolus phenylephrine or ephedrine for treatment of hypotension in women with pre-eclampsia undergoing caesarean section.
Treatment of post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section assumes special concern in pre-eclamptic patients due to a compromised fetoplacental circulation and increased risk of placental hypoperfusion. Phenylephrine and ephedrine are the most commonly used vasopressors, although the best choice is still not clear. We studied 80 pre-eclamptic women with a singleton pregnancy who underwent caesarean section with spinal anaesthesia, and who developed hypotension defined as a decrease in systolic arterial pressure ≥ 20% from baseline or absolute value < 100 mmHg. ⋯ The incidence of neonatal acidosis (umbilical artery pH < 7.20) was 9 (22.5%) in the phenylephrine group and 11 (27.5%) in the ephedrine group (p = 0.80). Other secondary outcome measures were comparable. In conclusion, phenylephrine 50 μg and ephedrine 4 mg, administered as intravenous boluses to treat post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section in pre-eclamptic patients, resulted in similar fetal acid-base values, were equally effective in treating hypotension and were associated with good maternal and neonatal outcome.
-
Meta Analysis
Combined spinal-epidural vs. spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: meta-analysis and trial-sequential analysis.
Combined spinal-epidural and single-shot spinal anaesthesia are both used for caesarean section. It has been claimed in individual trials that combined spinal-epidural is associated with higher sensory spread and greater cardiovascular stability. We set out to gather all available evidence. ⋯ The block times were statistically significantly longer for combined spinal-epidural in individual trials, but only one trial showed a clinically meaningful difference (11 min). Based on this analysis, and taking into consideration all comparisons irrespective of whether drugs had been applied via the epidural route, there is not enough evidence to postulate any advantage compared with the spinal technique. Future analyses and studies need to examine the potential advantages of the combined spinal-epidural technique by using the epidural route intra- and/or postoperatively.