Comparative Study between Paracervical Block and Non-Steroidal Anti Inflammatory Drug for Relief of Pain during Manual Vacuum Aspiration Procedure.

The incidence of first trimester pregnancy loss is around 10.0-20.0% of registered pregnancies. Manual vacuum aspiration is a safe, effective and acceptable option of treatment for patients diagnosed with first trimester pregnancy loss. Main disadvantage of MVA is the pain caused by manipulation of the cervix, the uterine suction and the cervical dilatation. This study showed the way how the pain and discomfort might be reduced. This was a cross-sectional comparative study was conducted at the obstetrics and Gynecological Department of Sadar hospital, Manikganj, Bangladesh from January 2017 to December 2017. All the consecutive women admitted and diagnosed as incomplete abortion, missed abortion and anembryonic pregnancy (blighted ovum) were included in this study. Sampling technique was purposive sampling. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of paracervical block anesthesia with non-steroidal anti inflammatory drug (NSAID) for relief of pain during the manual vacuum aspiration procedure for the treatment of first trimester pregnancy loss. Total 120 cases were included in this study. Assigned study population were divided into two groups like Group A and Group B. 60 of the study population were included in Group A who were given paracervical block anesthesia 3 minutes before the procedure. Another 60 study population was included in Group B who was given diclofenac 75mg intramuscular injection, 30 minutes before the procedure. Both intraoperative and postoperative pain level was evaluated by using visual analog scale ranged from (0-10 points) 30 minutes after the procedure. At the same time the satisfaction level of the study population were measured by 5 points lickert scale. Regarding clinical profile of the study population it showed no significant difference in case of mean age, mean gestational age and mean duration of the procedure between two groups. The mean intraoperative pain score in Group A was 4.0±1.3, in Group B it was 5.4±1.5 (p=0.001) which was significant. So it showed that paracervical block anesthesia significantly reduced the pain in relation to diclofenac 75mg intramuscular injection. Mean postoperative pain level 30 minutes after procedure in Group A was 2.2±0.4 and in Group B was 2.4±0.4 (p=0.343), where post-operative pain is lower in Group A than Group B. Though this difference is not statistically significant (p=0.343). In Group A 73.0% (n=44) and in Group B 43.0% (n=26) study population were agreed that the procedure was easy. Most common adverse effect was epigastric pain which was 1.7% (n=1) in Group A and 10.0% (n=7) in Group B. Paracervical block significantly reduces intraoperative pain during Manual Vacuum Aspiration (MVA) procedure in the treatment of first trimester pregnancy loss in comparison to intramuscular injection of diclofenac. In conclusion it might be mentioned that regarding paracervical block anesthesia, efficacy is higher and side effects are less. Moreover paracervical block anesthesia is cost effective.

Is crystalloid co-loading necessary to prevent spinal hypotension during elective cesarean delivery? A randomized double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypotension is common during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Preventive strategies include fluid loading and phenylephrine. We hypothesized that if prophylactic phenylephrine infusion is used, omission of fluid loading would be non-inferior to fluid co-loading in maintaining cardiac output. We assumed that if there was a difference, the increase in cardiac output would be greater in the no-loading than in the co-loading group. METHODS: Term pregnant women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery were randomized to receive 1 L crystalloid co-loading or maintenance fluids only. Phenylephrine was titrated to maintain blood pressure. Changes in cardiac output following spinal anesthesia were the primary outcome. The study was powered as a non-inferiority trial, allowing the no-loading arm to have a 50% greater change in cardiac output. Heart rate, dose of phenylephrine, occurrence of nausea and vomiting, Apgar scores and neonatal acid base status were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 63 women were analyzed. In contrast to our hypothesis, there was 33% less increase in cardiac output with no loading (ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.36), and 60% greater reduction of cardiac output with no loading (ratio 1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.7). Total dose of phenylephrine was higher in the no-loading group. There may be a less favorable neonatal acid base status without volume loading. CONCLUSION: Omission of crystalloid co-loading leads to a decrease in cardiac output which has a potentially unfavorable impact on neonatal acid base status. We conclude that crystalloid co-loading may be useful in the presence of phenylephrine infusion.

Effect of phenylephrine rescue injection on hypotension after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery when guided by both heart rate and SBP during an early warning window: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anaesthesia is now the most common technique for caesarean delivery. However, because of the intermittent nature of noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements, maternal blood pressure may become hypotensive between the measurements. There is thus an inbuilt delay before the anaesthesiologist can intervene to counteract the hypotension. Based on the principle that changes in blood pressure can induce compensatory changes in the heart rate (HR), combining the NIBP with real-time HR, we designed two warning windows to predict hypotension and hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether phenylephrine administration guided by these warning windows would help maintain haemodynamic stability. SETTING: A teaching hospital. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. PATIENTS: One hundred and ten pregnant women scheduled for elective caesarean delivery were enrolled, from which, after exclusions, 86 were eligible for the study. INTERVENTIONS: All eligible patients received a continuous intravenous infusion of phenylephrine as soon as spinal anaesthesia was initiated. Thereafter, patients were randomly assigned to two groups. In the test group (Win-Group): rescue phenylephrine administration was triggered by an early warning window of HR above 100 beats per minute (bpm) and SBP 90 to 110 mmHg; pausing the infusion phenylephrine was triggered by a HR lower than 60 bpm and SBP greater than 90 mmHg. In the control group, phenylephrine was guided by BP only when it appeared on the monitor: SBP less than 90 mmHg was the trigger for administering rescue phenylephrine; SBP greater than 110 mmHg was the trigger for pausing the phenylephrine infusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was incidence of hypotension. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of hypertension and other adverse haemodynamic events. RESULTS: The incidence of hypotension was significantly lower in the Win-Group than in the BP-Group (27.8 vs. 66.7%, P  = 0.001). The minimum SBP was significantly higher in Win-Group than in BP-Group (93.9 ±â€Š9.49 vs. 86.7 ±â€Š11.16 mmHg, P   =  0.004). There was no significant difference in the incidence of hypertension between groups. CONCLUSION: After spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery, when phenylephrine infusion is guided by HR along with BP from a warning window it effectively reduces the incidence of hypotension without any significant effect on incidence of hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chictr.org.cn; Identifier: ChiCTR 2100041812.

Anesthetic recommendations for maternal and fetal safety in nonobstetric surgery: a balancing act.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy is associated with maternal and fetal risks. Several physiologic changes create unique challenges for anesthesiologists. This review highlights physiologic changes of pregnancy and presents clinical recommendations based on recent literature to guide anesthetic management for the pregnant patient undergoing nonobstetric surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Nearly every anesthetic technique has been safely used in pregnant patients. Although it is difficult to eliminate confounding factors, exposure to anesthetics could endanger fetal brain development. Perioperative fetal monitoring decisions require an obstetric consult based on anticipated maternal and fetal concerns. Given the limitations of fasting guidelines, bedside gastric ultrasound is useful in assessing aspiration risk in pregnant patients. Although there is concern about appropriateness of sugammadex for neuromuscular blockade reversal due its binding to progesterone, preliminary literature supports its safety. SUMMARY: These recommendations will equip anesthesiologists to provide safe care for the pregnant patient and fetus undergoing nonobstetric surgery.

Failed spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery: prevention, identification and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is an increasing awareness of the significance of intraoperative pain during cesarean delivery. Failure of spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery can occur preoperatively or intraoperatively. Testing of the neuraxial block can identify preoperative failure. Recognition of the risk of high neuraxial block in repeat spinal in case of preoperative failure is important. RECENT FINDING: Knowledge of risk factors for block failure facilitates prevention by selecting the most appropriate neuraxial procedure, adequate intrathecal doses and choice of technique. Intraoperative pain is not uncommon, and neither obstetricians nor anesthesiologists can adequately identify intraoperative pain. Early intraoperative pain should be treated differently from pain towards the end of surgery. SUMMARY: Block testing is crucial to identify preoperative failure of spinal anesthesia. Repeat neuraxial is possible but care must be taken with dosing. In this situation, switching to a combined spinal epidural or an epidural technique can be useful. Intraoperative pain must be acknowledged and adequately treated, including offering general anesthesia. Preoperative informed consent should include block failure and its management.

Epidural ropivacaine versus bupivacaine for cesarean sections: a system review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: It is still no consensus on the use of ropivacaine or bupivacaine in epidural anesthesia for cesarean section (CS), because their anesthetic potency and relative complications remains controversial. This system review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of epidural ropivacaine and bupivacaine for elective CSs and investigate relative complications for parturients and neonates. METHODS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Science-Direct, and Google Scholar to June 30, 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which compared epidural ropivacaine with bupivacaine for elective CSs. The success rate of epidural anesthesia (EA) was primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included onset times of sensory block, maternal side effects, neonatal Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH. RESULTS: We analyzed 8 RCTs with 532 parturients. 0.75% ropivacaine is associated with a shorter onset time of sensory block than 0.5% bupivacaine (SMD = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.70 to -0.17; p = .001). 0.5% ropivacaine resulted in a reduced nausea than 0.5% bupivacaine (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.83; p = .008). In addition, there were no significant difference between ropivacaine and bupivacaine groups in terms of success rate of epidural anesthesia, maternal side effects (hypotension, bradycardia, shivering), and neonatal Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that there were no significant difference between epidural ropivacaine and bupivacaine for elective CSs in terms of the success rate (85.9% vs. 83.5), maternal side effects (hypotension, bradycardia, shivering), and neonatal Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH. But compared with 0.5% bupivacaine, epidural 0.75% ropivacaine was mildly effective for reducing onset time of sensory block and 0.5% ropivacaine reduced the incidence of maternal nausea.

Changes in the corrected carotid flow time can predict spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension in patients undergoing cesarean delivery: an observational study.

PURPOSE: Spinal anesthesia is a standard technique for cesarean delivery; however, it possesses a risk of hypotension. We hypothesised that the changes in the corrected flow time induced by the Trendelenburg position could predict the incidence of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were enrolled. Before anesthesia induction, corrected flow time was measured in the supine and Trendelenburg positions (FTc-1 and FTc-2, respectively). Additionally, a percent change in corrected flow time induced by the Trendelenburg position was defined as ΔFTc. The primary endpoint was to investigate the ability of ΔFTc to predict the incidence of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension until delivery. The receiver operating characteristics curves to assess the ability of FTc-1, FTc-2, and ΔFTc to predict the incidence of hypotension were generated. RESULTS: Finally, 40 patients were included, and of those, 26 (65%) developed spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension. The areas under the curve for FTc-1, FTc-2, and ΔFTc were 0.591 (95% CI: 0.424 to 0.743) (P = 0.380), 0.742 (95% CI: 0.579 to 0.867) (P = 0.004), and 0.882 (95% CI: 0.740 to 0.962) (P < 0.001) respectively, indicating ΔFTc as the best predictor among these three parameters. The best threshold for ΔFTc was 6.4% (sensitivity: 80.8% (95% CI: 53.8 to 96.2), specificity: 85.7% (95% CI: 42.9 to 100.0)). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that changes in the corrected carotid flow time induced by the Trendelenburg position could serve as a good predictor of spinal anesthesia-induced hypotension for cesarean delivery.

Incidence and clinical impact of aspiration during cesarean delivery: A multi-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The risk of aspiration during general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has long been thought to be increased due to factors such as increased intra-abdominal pressures and delayed gastric emptying in pregnant patients. However, recent studies have reported normal gastric emptying in pregnant patients, suggesting that the risk of aspiration may not be as high as previously believed. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 48,609 cesarean deliveries, of which 22,690 (46.7%) were performed under general anesthesia at two large tertiary medical centers in Israel. The study aimed to examine the incidence of potentially severe aspiration during cesarean delivery, both under general and neuraxial anesthesia. RESULTS: Among the patients included in the study, three were admitted to the intensive care unit due to suspected pulmonary aspiration. Two of these cases occurred during induction of general anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery associated with difficult intubation and one under deep sedation during spinal anesthesia. The incidence of aspiration during cesarean delivery during general anesthesia in our study was 1 in 11,345 patients, and the incidence of aspiration during neuraxial anesthesia was 1 in 25,929 patients. No deaths due to aspiration were reported during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide another contemporary analysis of aspiration rates in obstetric patients, highlighting increased risks during the management of difficult airways during general anesthesia and deep sedation associated with neuraxial anesthesia.

Cardiac arrest in obstetric patients receiving anaesthetic care: results from the 7th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists.

The 7th National Audit Project (NAP7) of the Royal College of Anaesthetists studied peri-operative cardiac arrest. Additional inclusion criteria for obstetric anaesthesia were: cardiac arrest associated with neuraxial block performed by an anaesthetist outside the operating theatre (labour epidural analgesia); and cardiac arrest associated with remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia. There were 28 cases of cardiac arrest in obstetric patients, representing 3% of all cardiac arrests reported to NAP7, giving an incidence of 7.9 per 100,000 (95%CI 5.4-11.4 per 100,000). Obstetric patients were approximately four times less likely to have a cardiac arrest during anaesthesia care than patients having non-obstetric surgery. The single leading cause of peri-operative cardiac arrest in obstetric patients was haemorrhage, with underestimated severity and inadequate early resuscitation being contributory factors. When taken together, anaesthetic causes, high neuraxial block and bradyarrhythmia associated with spinal anaesthesia were the leading causes overall. Two patients had a cardiac arrest related to labour neuraxial analgesia. There were no cardiac arrests related to failed airway management or remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia.

Anesthesia Liability Related to Pre-existing Conditions.

In 1985, the American Society of Anesthesiologists initiated a quality improvement closed claims analysis project for anesthetic injury to elevate patient safety. To date, there have been a total of 8954 documented claims, describing injuries contracted under sedation, regional anesthesia, or failure to attend to a patient's post-operative needs. The Closed Claims database reveals that the most highly documented health care complications were a loss of life at 2%, nerve injuries at 2%, and damage to the brain at 9%. The highest documented cases of damage from anesthesia involved regional-block-related events at 20%, followed by respiratory-related adverse effects at 17%, cardiovascular-related events at 13%, together with apparatus-linked events at 10%. Injury may result from several causes. First, multiple techniques and interventions are used during surgery, and all have potential adverse effects. Additionally, many patients scheduled for surgery have extensive past medical histories and medical comorbidities, thereby increasing their baseline risk for injury. From the Closed Claims database, improved evaluation of clinical-related implications linked to injuries within the handling of airway, sedation, non-operational room locales, obstetric anesthesia, along with chronic pain management. In summary, anesthesia departments should review outcomes of their patients on a routine basis. Assessing factors when an adverse outcome occurs may allow for changes in techniques or other anesthesia considerations to help lessen or prevent future complications.

The Incidence and Predictors of Failed Spinal Anesthesia After Intrathecal Injection of Local Anesthetic for Cesarean Delivery: A Single-Center, 9-Year Retrospective Review.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of failed spinal anesthesia varies widely in the obstetric literature. Although many risk factors have been suggested, their relative predictive value is unknown. The primary objective of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the incidence of failed spinal anesthesia for cesarean deliveries at a tertiary care obstetric hospital, and its secondary objectives were to identify predictors of failed spinal anesthesia in the obstetrics population and quantify their relative importance in a predictive model for failure. METHODS: With local institutional ethics committee approval, a retrospective review of our hospital database identified the incidence of failed spinal anesthesia for 5361 cesarean deliveries between 2010 and 2019. We performed a multivariable analysis to assess the association of predictors with failure and a dominance analysis to assess the importance of each predictor. RESULTS: The incidence of failed spinal anesthesia requiring an alternative anesthetic was 2.1%, with conversion to general anesthesia occurring in 0.7% of surgeries. Supplemental analgesia or sedation was provided to an additional 2.0% of women. The most important predictors of a failed spinal anesthetic were previous cesarean delivery (odds ratio [OR], 11.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.09-18.20; P < .001), concomitant tubal ligation (OR, 8.23; 95% CI, 3.12-19.20; P < .001), lower body mass index (BMI) (kg·m -2 , OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.98; P = .005), and longer surgery duration (minutes, OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .006). Previous cesarean delivery was the most significant risk factor, contributing to 9.6% of the total 17% variance predicted by all predictors examined. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia failed to provide a pain-free surgery in 4.1% of our cesarean deliveries. Previous cesarean delivery was the most important predictor of spinal failure. Other important predictors included tubal ligation, lower BMI, and longer surgery duration.

Risk factors for failure of conversion from epidural labor analgesia to cesarean section anesthesia and general anesthesia incidence: an updated meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Ongoing controversies persist regarding risk factors associated with the failure of transition from epidural labor analgesia to cesarean section anesthesia, including the duration of labor analgesia, gestational age, and body mass index (BMI). This study aims to provide an updated analysis of the incidence of conversion from epidural analgesia to general anesthesia, while evaluating and analyzing potential risk factors contributing to the failure of this transition to cesarean section anesthesia. METHODS: We conducted an extensive literature search utilizing databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WANGFANG, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) up to September 30, 2022. The meta-analysis was performed using STATA 15.1 software. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the 11-item quality assessment scale recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). RESULTS: A total of 9,926 studies were initially retrieved, and after rigorous selection, 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall incidence of conversion from epidural analgesia to general anesthesia was found to be 6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5-8%). Our findings indicate that, when compared to patients in the successful conversion group, those in the failure group tended to be younger (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -1.571, 95% CI: -1.116 to -0.975) and taller (WMD = 0.893, 95% CI: 0.018-1.767). Additionally, the failure group exhibited a higher incidence of incomplete block in epidural anesthesia, received a higher dosage of additional epidural administration, experienced a greater rate of emergency cesarean sections, and received anesthesia more frequently from non-obstetric anesthesiologists. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in gestational age, depth of the catheter insertion into the skin, epidural catheter specifics, duration of epidural analgesia, infusion rate of epidural analgesia, primiparity status, cervical dilatation during epidural placement, BMI, or weight. CONCLUSION: Our study found that the incidence of conversion from epidural analgesia to cesarean section under general anesthesia was 6%. Notably, the failure group exhibited a higher rate of incomplete block in epidural anesthesia, a greater incidence of emergency cesarean sections, a more frequent provision of anesthesia by non-obstetric anesthesiologists, a higher dosage of epidural administration, and greater height when compared to the success group. Conversely, women in the failure group were younger in age compared to their counterparts in the success group.

Risk factors for epidural anesthesia blockade failure in cesarean section: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Epidural anesthesia (EA) is the regional anesthesia technique preferred over spinal anesthesia for pregnant women requiring cesarean section and post-operative pain control. EA failure requires additional sedation or conversion to general anesthesia (GA). This may be hazardous during sedation or GA conversion because of potentially difficult airways. Therefore, this retrospective study aimed to determine the risk factors for epidural failure during cesarean section anesthesia. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed parturients who underwent cesarean section under EA and catheterization at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taiwan between January 1 and December 31, 2018. Patient data were collected from the medical records. EA failure was defined as the administration of any intravenous anesthetic at any time during a cesarean section, converting it into GA. RESULTS: A total of 534 parturients who underwent cesarean section were recruited for this study. Of them, 94 (17.6%) experienced EA failure during cesarean section. Compared to the patients with successful EA, those with EA failure were younger (33.0 years vs. 34.7 years), had received EA previously (60.6% vs. 37%), were parous (72.3% vs. 55%), and had a shorter waiting time (14.9 min vs. 16.5 min) (p < 0.05). Younger age (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.95), history of epidural analgesia (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.38-4.94), and shorter waiting time (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.97) were estimated to be significantly associated with a higher risk of epidural anesthesia failure. CONCLUSION: The retrospective study found that parturients of younger age, previous epidural catheterization history, and inadequate waiting time may have a higher risk of EA failure. Previous epidural catheterization increased the risk of EA failure by 2.6-fold compared to patient with no history of catheterization.

[Obstetric Anesthesia]. / Geburtshilfliche Anästhesie.

Patient safety and reduction of possible complications are the top priorities for anesthesiologists in everyday clinical practice. Thus, interdisciplinary early assessment and optimization of patient specific medical conditions and risk factors are crucial. In obstetrics, regional anesthesia and general anesthesia are routinely being performed. To ensure maternal and fetal safety, knowledge regarding physiological changes during pregnancy is highly important. Regional anesthesia, particularly epidural analgesia, has its main field of application in the context of natural birth in the delivery room. Spinal anesthesia, as well as epidural and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE) are widely used for caesarean section. In this context, special attention should be paid to possible bleeding disorders. The combination of risk stratification and strategies to improve the patient's preoperative medical status is capable to reduce maternal and fetal complications.

Calculation of effective dose of phenylephrine bolus for treatment of post-spinal hypotension in pre-eclamptic patients undergoing caesarean section - a non-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pre-eclampsia require smaller vasopressor doses compared with those with normotension for management of post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section. However, the literature has little evidence as to the phenylephrine dose required for patients with pre-eclampsia. METHODS: Fifty patients, with either pre-eclampsia or normotension, and developing post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia, were studied. Women in both groups did not receive prophylactic vasopressors. The first patient in each group received phenylephrine 50 µg to treat the first episode of hypotension, defined as fall of systolic blood pressure ≥20% from baseline or an absolute value <100 mmHg. If hypotension was corrected within one minute it was considered a 'success'. The doses for the subsequent patients were determined by responses to all previous patients, according to a variation of Narayana's rule for the up-down sequential allocation method. RESULTS: The 95% effective dose (ED95) and 50% effective dose (ED50) of phenylephrine was 41.7 µg (95% CI 33.8 to 49.6 µg) and 29.1 µg (95% CI 26.0 to 32.2 µg) respectively in the pre-eclampsia group, and 64.9 µg (95% CI 54.1 to 75.7 µg) and 47.3 µg (95% CI 39.7 to 54.9 µg) respectively in the normotensive group. The proportionate reduction in phenylephrine dose ranged from 33% (95% CI 18 to 44%) to 40% (95% CI 19 to 52%). CONCLUSION: Patients with pre-eclampsia may need a 33% to 40% reduction in the first phenylephrine bolus dose, compared with patients with normotension, for the treatment of the first episode of post-spinal hypotension.

Analysis of anaesthesia incidents during caesarean section reported to webAIRS between 2009 and 2022.

Anaesthesia for caesarean section occurs commonly and places specific demands on anaesthetists. We analysed 469 narratives concerning anaesthesia for caesarean section, entered by Australian and New Zealand anaesthetists into the webAIRS incident reporting system between 2009 and 2022. As expected, compared with the remaining 8978 database entries, the 469 incidents were more likely to be emergency cases (relative risk (RR) 1.95), more likely to occur between 18:00 and 22:00 hours (RR 1.81) and between 22:00 and 07:59 hours (RR 4.40) and more likely to be undertaken using neuraxial anaesthesia (RR 9.18). Most incidents involved more than one event. The most commonly reported incidents included intraoperative neuraxial anaesthesia complications (180, 38%), medication errors or issues (136, 29%), equipment issues (49, 10%), obstetric haemorrhage (38, 8%), maternal cardiac arrests (28, 6%), endotracheal tube issues (28, 6%) and neonatal resuscitation (24, 5%). Inadequate neuraxial block, reported in 95 incidents, was the most common intraoperative neuraxial complication. Allergic reactions, reported in 30 incidents, were the most common medication issue, followed by 17 associated with oxytocin and 16 syringe swaps. Thirty-eight reports included significant maternal haemorrhage, with eight of those incidents including maternal cardiac arrest. There was one maternal death and eight incidents with neonatal deaths reported, affecting nine neonates. Problems with intraoperative neuraxial anaesthesia were the most commonly reported events. Implementation of specific strategies are encouraged to enhance preparation for conversion to general anaesthesia and to mitigate medication errors, particularly those relating to oxytocic use and neuraxial anaesthesia medications.