RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Adverse effects of opioid analgesics and potential for chronic use are limitations in the cesarean setting. Regional anesthesia using transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block post-cesarean delivery may improve analgesia and reduce opioid consumption. Effectiveness of TAP block using liposomal bupivacaine (LB) to reduce post-cesarean pain is unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective chart review of patients aged ≥18 years who underwent cesarean delivery with a multimodal pain management protocol with or without TAP block with LB 266 mg. Assessments included postsurgical opioid consumption; area under the curve (AUC) of numeric rating scale pain scores from 0 to 3 days; proportion of opioid-free patients; discharge- and post-anesthesia care unit (PACU)-ready time; times to ambulation, solid food, and bowel movement; hospital length of stay (LOS); and adverse events (AEs). Data were analyzed in the total population and in first- and repeat-cesarean subgroups using Wilcoxon, chi-squared, and Student's t-tests. RESULTS: Of 201 patients, 101 were treated with LB TAP block (LB-TAPB) and 100 without LB-TAPB. Treatment with LB-TAPB vs without LB-TAPB significantly reduced mean post-surgical opioid consumption (total, 47%; first-cesarean, 54%; repeat-cesarean, 42%; P<0.001 each) and mean AUC of pain scores (total, 46%; first-cesarean, 57%; repeat-cesarean, 40%; P<0.001 each). Patients treated with LB-TAPB had significantly shorter mean discharge-ready times (2.9 vs 3.6 days; P=0.006), PACU-ready times (138 vs 163 minutes; P=0.028), and LOS (2.9 vs 3.9 days; P<0.001). LB-TAPB significantly decreased mean times to ambulation and solid food by 39% and 31% (P<0.01 each), respectively, and numerically reduced mean time to bowel movement (26%; P=0.05). Fewer patients treated with LB-TAPB vs without LB-TAPB reported an AE (34% vs 50%; P=0.026). CONCLUSION: These results suggest multimodal pain management incorporating TAP block with LB 266 mg is an effective approach to reducing opioid requirements and improving analgesia post-cesarean delivery.
RESUMEN
Since its inception, many have questioned the utility of electronic fetal heart rate (FHR) monitoring. However, it arrived without the benefit of clear, standard nomenclature, leading to difficulty interpreting studies regarding its benefit. In 2008, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) developed standard nomenclature for interpreting eFHR tracings. Understanding what drives the tracings is key to managing them. Category II FHR patterns are by far the most common and most diverse patterns, leading to broad variation in care. Presented here is an algorithm for standardization of management of category II FHR tracings, based on the pathophysiology of decelerations, that can be followed in any labor unit.
